High Court Verdict: No Stay On Release Of ‘Zanjeer’

0
55
The High Court has refused to stay the release of the 'Zanjeer' remake, thereby not granting interim relief to the original 'Zanjeer' writers Salim Khan and Javed Akhtar.
The High Court has refused to stay the release of the 'Zanjeer' remake, thereby not granting interim relief to the original 'Zanjeer' writers Salim Khan and Javed Akhtar.

ZANJEER03092013

MUMBAI: Looks like in the fight of Salim-Javed versus the ‘Zanjeer’ remake, it is ‘Zanjeer’ remake – 1 and Salim-Javed – 0.

The High Court has refused to stay the release of the ‘Zanjeer’ remake, directed by Apoorva Lakhia, which is a remake of the Prakash Mehra-directed Amitabh Bachchan-starrer, which was written by Salim Khan and Javed Akhtar.

Salim-Javed had filed a suit in the High Court stating that they had copyrights to the story, dialogues and script of ‘Zanjeer’, and that no permission was taken from them to remake the film. They also added that they had allowed Prakash Mehra to make the film from their script just once, so the new producers would have to take their permission to remake it, which Prakash Mehra’s son Sumeet hadn’t.

Because of this, Salim-Javed wanted a compensation of Rs 6 crore and a stay on the release of the film.

Justice SJ Kathawala, however, did not provide any interim relief. He stated, “In this case, the plaintiffs have not only delayed issuing of the legal notice as well as filing of the suit against the defendants but have themselves asserted that a sum of Rs six crores would be a fair and reasonable monetary compensation.”

He then went on to add, “The plaintiffs are, therefore, not entitled to a mandatory injunction as sought even if this court would have come to the conclusion that the plaintiffs are the owners of the copyright as alleged since the plaintiffs’ claim falls within the provisions of Section 38(3)(c) and not under Section 38(3)(b) of Specific Relief Act.”

Section 38(3)(c) states that a court can grant permanent injunction in cases where the defendant invades plaintiff’s right and the invasion is such that compensation in money would not afford adequate relief.

After the verdict was passed by the High Court, Ravi Kadam, the counsel for the plaintiffs, made an oral plea. Justice DY Chandrachud, before whose bench this plea was made, asked Ravi Kadam to file a written plea and posted the matter for hearing on Tuesday.