The Delhi High Court declined interim relief in a copyright dispute concerning alleged similarities between the film “Dhurandhar” and the work “Tirchi Topiwale”, observing that no case for restraining the OTT release was made out at this stage.
The Delhi High Court has refused to stay the OTT release of the film Dhurandhar in a copyright infringement suit.
The suit alleged unauthorised use of elements from the work Tirchi Topiwale.
Justice Amit Bansal passed the order while hearing a plea filed by the plaintiff.
The plaintiff claimed copyright infringement and sought an interim order restraining the release and streaming of the film.
However, the Court held that the plaintiff had not established a prima facie case for injunction at the interim stage.
Copyright Dispute Over Alleged Similarities
The dispute arose from alleged similarities between Dhurandhar and the plaintiff’s copyrighted work Tirchi Topiwale.
The plaintiff claimed that the film copied substantial elements, characters, and thematic aspects from the original work.
Therefore, the plaintiff approached the High Court before the film’s OTT release.
The plaintiff argued that the defendants had reproduced substantial parts of the work without authorisation.
It was also argued that the release of the film would cause irreparable injury to the plaintiff’s copyright interests.
Defendants Claim Independent Creation
The defendants opposed the plea for interim relief.
They argued that the film was independently created.
They also submitted that the film did not amount to copyright infringement.
According to the defendants, the plaintiff could not claim monopoly over broad ideas, themes, or generic plot elements.
Court Examines Copyright Principles
While considering the injunction plea, the Court referred to settled principles of copyright law.
Justice Amit Bansal observed that copyright protects the expression of an idea, not the idea itself.
The Court noted that similarities in theme, concept, or general storyline cannot by themselves establish infringement.
It added that the plaintiff must show substantial copying of protectable expression.
At the prima facie stage, the Court found no sufficient basis to restrain the release.
The Court held that the plaintiff had not shown that the film copied substantial and material elements of Tirchi Topiwale.
Balance Of Convenience Favoured Release
The High Court also considered the balance of convenience.
It noted that staying a film’s release at an advanced stage could cause serious commercial consequences.
Therefore, the Court declined to grant interim injunction against the OTT release of Dhurandhar.
Suit To Continue On Merits
Although the Court refused interim relief, the suit will continue before the High Court.
The related proceedings will also proceed for adjudication on merits.
The Court clarified that its observations were only prima facie in nature.
It also said these observations would not affect the final decision in the copyright dispute.
