AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Disposition
Advocates
Judges
Acts
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Disposition
Advocates
Judges
Acts
Smart Summary

Factual and Procedural Background

The petitioner, Radio Next Webcastion Pvt. Ltd., challenged an Administrative Order dated 16.05.2018 issued by the Registry of the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (the Appellate Board). The impugned order declined to place the petitioner's application filed under Section 31D of the Copyright Act, 1957, before the Appellate Board. The stated reason was the absence of a technical member (copyright) on the Appellate Board, resulting in matters related to the Copyright Act not being listed until such a member is appointed. The respondents informed the Court that steps were underway to appoint a technical member (copyright), including issuing advertisements for the post. Meanwhile, the Appellate Board continued to function and hear matters related to the Trade Marks Act, 1999 and the Patent Act, 1970.

Legal Issues Presented

  1. Whether the Appellate Board, as presently constituted without a technical member (copyright), has jurisdiction to examine matters relating to the Copyright Act.

Arguments of the Parties

Respondents' Arguments

  • Steps are being taken to appoint a technical member (copyright) pursuant to Rule 3 of the Copyright Rules, 2013.
  • An advertisement for the post has been issued and appointment is expected shortly.

The opinion does not contain a detailed account of the petitioner's arguments.

Table of Precedents Cited

No precedents were cited in the provided opinion.

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The Court analyzed the statutory framework governing the Copyright Act and the Trade Marks Act. Prior to 26.05.2017, Section 11 of the Copyright Act mandated the constitution of a Copyright Board comprising a Chairman and members. The Copyright Rules, 2013, similarly provided for the appointment and terms of office of the Chairman and members of the Copyright Board.

However, the Finance Act, 2017 amended Section 11 of the Copyright Act, abolishing the statutory provision for a Copyright Board and substituting it with the Intellectual Property Appellate Board established under Section 83 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999. The amended Section 11 explicitly designates the Appellate Board constituted under the Trade Marks Act as the Appellate Board for the purposes of the Copyright Act, empowering it to exercise jurisdiction, powers, and authority under the Copyright Act.

The Copyright Rules, 2013, were not amended to reflect this change, resulting in an obsolete provision regarding the appointment of a technical member (copyright) on the Copyright Board. The Court found this provision superfluous as the Copyright Act no longer provides for a separate Copyright Board.

Section 83 and Section 84 of the Trade Marks Act provide for the establishment and composition of the Intellectual Property Appellate Board, consisting of a Chairman, Vice-Chairman, and other members, including judicial and technical members. The Court noted that the Appellate Board has been validly constituted under the Trade Marks Act and is currently functional.

The Court held that a vacancy in the post of a technical member (copyright) does not affect the jurisdiction of the Appellate Board to hear matters under the Copyright Act. The Appellate Board, as presently constituted, has jurisdiction to exercise the powers conferred by the Copyright Act.

Holding and Implications

The impugned order declining to place the petitioner's application before the Appellate Board is set aside. The Court directed that the petitioner's application be placed before the Appellate Board as currently constituted, and that the Board shall examine the application in accordance with law.

The petition is disposed of accordingly, and all pending applications stand disposed of. This decision directly affects the parties by ensuring the petitioner's application is heard without delay, but does not establish any new precedent beyond clarifying the jurisdiction of the Appellate Board in the absence of a technical member (copyright).

To access the original judgment, please Sign In or Subscribe.

    Radio Next Webcastion Pvt. Ltd. v. Union Of India And Anr.

    $~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

    + W.P.(C) 5893/2018 & C.M. No. 22982/2018, 32754/2018

    RADIO NEXT WEBCASTION PVT. LTD. ..... Petitioner Through Mr.Sagar Chandra, Adv.

    versus

    UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. ..... Respondents

    Through Ms.Shiva Lakshmi, CGSC with Mr.Siddharth Singh & Mr.Ruchir

    Ranjan Rai, Advs.

    CORAM:

    HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

    O R D E R

    % 27.09.2018

    VIBHU BAKHRU, J

    1. The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, impugning an Administrative Order dated 16.05.2018 (impugned order) passed by the Registry of Intellectual Property Appellate Board (hereafter 'the Appellate Board') declining to place the petitioner's application filed under Section 31D of the Copyright Act, 1957 (hereafter 'the Copyright Act') before the Appellate Board. The impugned order indicates that the petitioner's application is declined on the ground that there is no technical member (copyright) to place the application before the Appellate Board and, therefore, till such time that a technical member (copyright) is appointed, the matters relating to Copyright Act would not be listed before the Appellate Board.

    1

    2. Ms.Shiva Lakshmi, counsel appearing for the respondents states that steps are being taken for appointing a technical member (copyright) in terms of Rule 3 of the Copyright Rules, 2013 and states that advertisement for such posts have been issued and is it expected that such appointment would be made shortly.

    3. Although, a technical member (copyright) has not been appointed as yet, it is not disputed that the Appellate Board is functional and is hearing the matters with regard to the Trademarks Act, 1999 as well as the Patent Act, 1970.

    4. The only question that falls for consideration of this Court is whether the Appellate Board, as presently constituted, has the jurisdiction to examine matters relating to the Copyright Act

    5. Section 11 of the Copyright Act 1957, as existed prior to 26.05.2017, read as under:

    "11. Copyright Board. (1) As soon as may be after the commencement of this Act, the Central Government shall constitute a Board to be called the Copyright Board which shall consist of a Chairman and two other members.

    (2) The salaries and allowances payable to and the other terms and conditions of service of the Chairman and other members of the Copyright Board shall be such as may be prescribed: Provided that neither the salary and allowances nor the other terms and conditions of service of the Chairman or any other member shall be varied to his disadvantage after appointment.

    (3) The Chairman of the Copyright Board shall be a

    2

    person who is, or has been, a Judge of a High Court or is qualified for appointment as a Judge of a High Court.

    (4) The Central Government may after consultation with the Chairman of the Copyrights Board, appoint a Secretary to the Copyright Board and such other officers and employees as may be considered necessary for the efficient discharge of the functions of the Copyright Board."

    6. Copyright Rules, 2013, which came into effect on 14.03.2013, also expressly contained rules for constitution of the Copyright Board. Rule 3(1) of the said Rules is set out below:

    "3. Terms and conditions of the office of the Chairman or members of the Board.— (1) The Chairman and other members of the Board shall be appointed for such period not exceeding five years as the Central Government may in each case deems fit:

    Provided that the Chairman and the other member shall not hold office as such after he has attained,-

    (a) In the case of Chairman, the age of sixty-five years; and

    (b) In the case of any other Member, the age of sixty-two years."

    7. However, by virtue of the Finance Act, 2017, Section 11 of the Copyright Act was amended and provisions for constitution of a Copyright Board were substituted. Therefore, with effect from 26.05.2017, there was no statutory provision for constitution of a Copyright Board. Section 11 of the Copyright Act, as substituted with effect from 26.05.2017, reads as under:

    3

    "11. Appellate Board.—The Appellate Board established under section 83 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 shall, on and from the commencement of Part XIV of Chapter VI of the Finance Act, 2017, be the Appellate Board for the purposes of this Act and the said Appellate Board shall exercise the jurisdiction, powers and authority conferred on it by or under this Act."

    8. It is apparent from the above that with the introduction of the said statutory amendment, there is now no requirement for constitution of a Copyright Board. However, the Copyright Rules, 2013 - which came into force with effect from 14.03.2013 - were not amended to incorporate a corresponding change necessary as a consequence of the amendment in the Copyright Act. The said Rules were framed by the Central Government in exercise of powers conferred under Section 78 of the Copyright Act, which enables the Central Government to frame rules "for carrying out the purposes of the Act". Clearly, the said Rules, insofar as they provide for composition of a Copyright Board, serve no purpose of Copyright Act. Rule 3 of the said rules is superfluous since the Copyright Act, itself, does no longer provide for constitution of a Copyright Board.

    9. Section 83 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 (hereafter 'the Trade Marks Act') provides for establishment of an Appellate Board. Section 84 of the Trade Marks Act provides for composition of the Appellate Board. The said Sections are set out below:

    "83. Establishment of Appellate Board.— The Central Government shall, by notification in the Official Gazette, establish an Appellate Board to be known

    4

    as the Intellectual Property Appellate Board to exercise the jurisdiction, powers and authority conferred on it by or under this Act.

    84. Composition of Appellate Board.—

    (1) The Appellate Board shall consist of a Chairman, Vice-Chairman and such number of other Members, as the Central Government may, deem fit and, subject to the other provisions of this Act, the jurisdiction, powers and authority of the Appellate Board may be exercised by Benches thereof.

    (2) Subject to the other provisions of this Act, a Bench shall consist of one Judicial Member and one Technical Member and shall sit at such place as the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, specify.

    (3) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (2), the Chairman—

    (a) may, in addition to discharging the functions of the Judicial Member or Technical Member of the Bench to which he is appointed, discharge the functions of the Judicial Member or, as the case may be, the Technical Member, of any other Bench;

    (b) may transfer a Member from one Bench to another Bench;

    (c) may authorise the Vice-Chairman, the Judicial Member or the Technical Member appointed to one Bench to discharge also the functions of the Judicial Member or the Technical Member, as the case may be, of another Bench.

    (4) Where any Benches are constituted, the Central Government may, from time to time, by notification, make provisions as to the distribution of the business of the

    5

    Appellate Board amongst the Benches and specify the matters which may be dealt with by each Bench.

    (5) If any question arises as to whether any matter falls within the purview of the business allocated to a Bench, the decision of the Chairman shall be final.

    Explanation.—For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that the expression "matter" includes an appeal under section 91.

    (6) If the Members of a Bench differ in opinion on any point, they shall state the point or points on which they differ, and make a reference to the Chairman who shall either hear the point or points himself or refer the case for hearing on such point or points by one or more of the other Members and such point or points shall be decided according to the opinion of the majority of the Members who have heard the case, including those who first heard it."

    10. Having stated the above, it may be apposite for the respondent to also appoint a member technical (copyright), however, a vacancy in this regard does not in any manner impinge upon the jurisdiction of the Appellate Board as constituted under Section 83 of the Trade Marks Act.

    11. A conjoint reading of Section 11 of the Copyright Act and Section 83 of the Trade Marks Act clearly indicates that the Appellate Board as constituted under Section 83 of the Trade Marks Act would also have the jurisdiction to perform the functions under the Copyright Act as well. There is no dispute that an Appellate Board has been validly constituted in terms of Section 84 of the Trade Marks Act and is now functional. Thus, it is also required to "exercise the jurisdiction, powers and authority conferred on it by or under this Act [the Copyright Act]".

    6

    12. In the aforesaid view, the impugned order is unsustainable and is, accordingly, set aside. It is directed that the petitioner's application be placed before the Appellate Board as is currently constituted. The Appellate Board shall examine the same in accordance with law.

    13. The petition is disposed of in the above terms. All pending applications stand disposed of.

    VIBHU BAKHRU, J

    SEPTEMBER 27, 2018

    ab

    7

    Use AI to get other relevant cases.

    Comments

    Radio Next Webcastion Pvt. Ltd. v. Union Of India And Anr.
    (Sep 27, 2018)