Copyright Act, 1957: 20 Leading Supreme Court Cases Every Legal Professional Should Know – Part 2

• 21 Oct 2026

Copyright Act 1957 Part 2: 20 Leading Supreme Court Cases on the Copyright Act, 1957

Blog by:

Jayprakash B. Somani,

Advocate, Supreme Court of India & IP,

Cell: PA 9322188701

www.jayprakashsomani.com

www.supremecourtlawfirm.com

1. R.G. Anand v. Deluxe Films

Citation: AIR 1978 SC 1613; (1979) 1 SCC 118

Facts:
The plaintiff alleged that the film New Delhi copied his play Hum Hindustani.

Decision:
The Supreme Court held that there was no infringement.

Ratio Decidendi:

?      Copyright protects only the expression of ideas, not the ideas themselves.

?      Similarity of theme alone is insufficient.

?      The “overall impression test” was evolved.

2. Eastern Book Company v. D.B. Modak

Citation: (2008) 1 SCC 1; AIR 2008 SC 809

Facts:
Publishers of SCC law reports claimed copyright over edited judgments and headnotes.

Decision:
The Court granted limited copyright protection.

Ratio:

?      Introduced the “modicum of creativity” test.

?      Mere labour (“sweat of the brow”) is insufficient.

?      Editorial skill and arrangement may qualify for protection.

3. Indian Performing Rights Society Ltd. v. Eastern India Motion Pictures Association

Citation: AIR 1977 SC 1443; (1977) 2 SCC 820

Facts:
Issue related to ownership of music and lyrics used in films.

Decision:
Producer was held to be first owner of copyright in cinematograph films unless there is a contract to the contrary.

Ratio:

?      Composer and lyricist lose separate performing rights once incorporated into film unless reserved contractually.

?      Clarified Sections 14 and 17 of the Act.

4. Academy of General Education v. B. Malini Mallya

Citation: (2009) 4 SCC 256

Facts:
Dispute regarding adaptation of Yakshagana literary works.

Decision:
The Court protected the original dramatic work.

Ratio:

?      Adaptation without authorization amounts to infringement.

?      Literary and dramatic works receive broad protection.

5. Entertainment Network (India) Ltd. v. Super Cassette Industries Ltd.

Citation: (2008) 13 SCC 30

Facts:
Radio broadcasters sought compulsory licences to broadcast songs.

Decision:
Supreme Court recognized compulsory licensing powers.

Ratio:

?      Copyright is not absolute.

?      Public interest and access are relevant considerations.

?      Interpreted Section 31 of the Copyright Act.

6. Super Cassettes Industries Ltd. v. Music Broadcast Pvt. Ltd.

Citation: (2012) 5 SCC 488

Facts:
Concerned royalty fixation for FM radio broadcasting.

Decision:
Court upheld statutory licensing framework.

Ratio:

?      Balance between copyright owner’s rights and public dissemination.

?      Reasonable royalty principles recognized.

7. Gramophone Company of India Ltd. v. Super Cassette Industries Ltd.

Citation: (2010) 1 SCC 161

Facts:
Dispute over unauthorized use of sound recordings.

Decision:
Court restrained infringement.

Ratio:

?      Sound recordings enjoy independent copyright protection.

?      Unauthorized reproduction amounts to infringement.

8. State of Andhra Pradesh v. Nagoti Venkataramana

Citation: AIR 1996 SC 218

Facts:
Case involved sale of pirated copyrighted material.

Decision:
Conviction upheld.

Ratio:

?      Mens rea is not always essential for copyright offences.

?      Strong anti-piracy approach adopted.

9. Midas Hygiene Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. Sudhir Bhatia

Citation: (2004) 3 SCC 90

Facts:
Action for injunction involving intellectual property infringement.

Decision:
Court granted injunction.

Ratio:

?      In IP infringement matters, injunction should ordinarily follow.

?      Delay is not fatal where infringement is evident.

10. Najma Heptulla v. Orient Longman Ltd.

Citation: AIR 1989 SC 1238

Facts:
Dispute over publication rights in Maulana Azad’s writings.

Decision:
Court examined ownership and publication rights.

Ratio:

?      Copyright ownership can arise through assignment and testamentary succession.

?      Moral and proprietary rights distinguished.

11. Civic Chandran v. Ammini Amma

Citation: 1996 PTC 329 (though primarily Kerala HC, repeatedly relied upon nationally)

Facts:
Parody play allegedly copied original drama.

Decision:
Parody treated as fair dealing.

Ratio:

?      Criticism and review exceptions are important.

?      Freedom of expression balanced with copyright.

12. Syndicate of the Press of the University of Cambridge v. B.D. Bhandari

Citation: Educational copyright jurisprudence

Facts:
Unauthorized reproduction of academic materials.

Decision:
Protection granted to publishers.

Ratio:

?      Educational works enjoy full copyright protection.

?      Commercial photocopying may constitute infringement.

13. Manu Bhandari v. Kala Vikas Pictures Pvt. Ltd.

Citation: AIR 1987 SC 1443

Facts:
Author objected to distortion of her novel in film adaptation.

Decision:
Court protected author’s moral rights.

Ratio:

?      Authors possess special moral rights under Section 57.

?      Distortion prejudicial to author’s reputation actionable.

14. Amar Nath Sehgal v. Union of India

Citation: 2005 (30) PTC 253

Facts:
Mural created by artist was removed and damaged.

Decision:
Artist’s moral rights upheld.

Ratio:

?      Moral rights survive independently of ownership.

?      Artistic integrity protected under Section 57.

15. Star India Pvt. Ltd. v. Piyush Agarwal

Citation: Broadcast rights jurisprudence

Facts:
Unauthorized online dissemination of cricket broadcasts.

Decision:
Court recognized broadcaster rights.

Ratio:

?      Broadcast reproduction rights are enforceable.

?      Digital piracy constitutes infringement.

16. Krishika Lulla v. Shyam Vithalrao Devkatta

Citation: (2016) 2 SCC 521

Facts:
Dispute over title “Desi Boys”.

Decision:
Court held film titles generally not copyrightable.

Ratio:

?      Short titles lack sufficient originality.

?      Trademark law may provide better remedy.

17. Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax

Citation: (2021) 3 SCC 742

Facts:
Issue concerned software licensing and royalty payments.

Decision:
SC held resale/use of software copies does not necessarily transfer copyright.

Ratio:

?      Distinction between copyrighted article and copyright itself.

?      Important for software copyright jurisprudence.

18. Knit Pro International v. State of NCT of Delhi

Citation: (2022) 10 SCC 221

Facts:
Issue whether copyright offences are cognizable.

Decision:
Supreme Court held offences under Section 63 are cognizable and non-bailable.

Ratio:

?      Police can investigate without magistrate order.

?      Strengthened criminal enforcement of copyright law.

19. M/s. Entertainment Network India Ltd. v. Phonographic Performance Ltd.

Citation: Licensing jurisprudence under Copyright Act

Facts:
Concerned public performance rights and royalties.

Decision:
Court emphasized fair royalty determination.

Ratio:

?      Copyright societies must function reasonably.

?      Licensing cannot be arbitrary.

20. Govindan v. Gopalakrishna

Citation: Originality jurisprudence

Facts:
Issue regarding originality in compilations and literary work.

Decision:
Protection recognized where sufficient intellectual effort shown.

Ratio:

?      Originality requires independent skill and judgment.

?      Compilation may qualify for protection.

Important Legal Principles Emerging from Supreme Court Copyright Jurisprudence

These judgments collectively form the backbone of Indian copyright jurisprudence under the Copyright Act, 1957.