Delhi HC rejects Ilaiyaraaja's review petition over En Iniya Pon Nilave song copyright

The Delhi High Court on Tuesday refused to review its May 21 ruling that music composer Ilaiyaraaja did not hold the copyright over the lyrics and sound recording in the song En Iniya Pon Nilave from the Tamil film Moodu Pani [Ilaiyaraaja Vs Saregama].

A Division Bench of Justices C Hari Shankar and Om Prakash Shukla dismissed the review petition filed by Ilaiyaraaja, after holding that no error apparent on the face of the record of the order had been made out.

The review plea was filed questioning the correctness of the Court’s May 21 ruling, by which it had upheld an interim order in favour of Saregama.

The dispute began after Vels Film International used a recreated version of En Iniya Pon Nilave from Moodu Pani in its film Aghathiyaa, claiming a licence from Ilaiyaraaja. Saregama objected, saying it owned the rights through an assignment from the original producer.

The Delhi High Court eventually held that Ilaiyaraaja retained rights only in the musical component or tune of the song, not in the lyrics or sound recording. A single-judge's ruling on this was upheld on May 21 by the Division Bench.

During the hearing of the review petition against this ruling, Senior Advocate Swathi Sukumar, appearing for Ilaiyaraaja, argued that the Division Bench had recognised Ilaiyaraaja as the owner of the musical work, that is, the tune, but had still dismissed his appeal.

She submitted that this created an “irreconcilable” difficulty because the single-judge’s order effectively restrained Ilaiyaraaja from using his own musical work in another film.

The Bench, however, was not persuaded. It repeatedly noted that the scope of review was limited and that a review petition could not be used for a fresh round of arguments.

The Bench said that in its earlier judgment, it had taken a clear view that Ilaiyaraaja’s copyright existed only in the musical component of the song, and not in the lyrics or the sound recording.

Senior Advocates Akhil Sibal and J Sai Deepak appeared for Saregama.

They argued that Ilaiyaraaja’s case was based on an imaginary injunction. The senior counsel pointed out that the single-judge had permitted Vels to use the song in its film, provided they deposit ₹30 lakhs with the Registrar General. Only if the amount was not deposited would Vels be restrained from using the song, the Court was told.

The Court ultimately held that the earlier Division Bench judgment did not travel beyond the single-judge’s findings.

The Court added that the definition of “cinematograph film” under the Copyright Act includes sound recordings forming part of the film and accompanying its video recordings.

It, therefore, concluded that Ilaiyaraaja could not have licensed copyright in the sound recording or lyrical component of En Iniya Pon Nilave to any third party, including Vels.

“In that view of the matter, we see no reason to review our judgment. The review petition is dismissed,” the Court held.

Sukumar (for Ilaiyaraaja) was briefed by advocates Naveen Nagarjuna, Ritik Raghuwanshi, Rishik Agarwal and Shardula Murthy.

The Senior Advocates appearing for Saregama were briefed by Advocates Ankur Sangal, Ankit Arvind, Shaswat Rakshit and Rishab Rao from Khaitan & Co.