BARIN GHOSH, J. ( 1 ) ON 21st August, 1986 an agreement was entered between the plaintiff and the defendant No. 1. The said agreement contains the following, amongst others, covenants :"1. This agreement shall be for the film 'shatru' year (s) commencing on the 21st day of August 1986 and shall continue for. . . X. . successive periods of. . . X. . each on the same terms and conditions as are herein laid down unless the company terminates the agreement by giving notice in writing to the producer 60 days before the expiration of the initial or extended period ( 2 ) FOR the purpose of this agreement the following words shall have the meanings set forth against them :"work" shall mean any one or more of literary dramatic musical or artistic work as defined in the Copyright Act, 1957. "record" shall include a gramophone disc record, magnetic tape record (whether reel to reel, endless loop, in cassette or cartridge form or otherwise howsoever) or any other contrivance or appliance whatever bearing or used for emitting sounds whether or not the same also bears or can bear visual images or is or can be joined to be used in conjunction with or part of a contrivance or appliance bearing or used for giving visual images but shall exclude a cinematograph film as immediately hereafter defined. "cinematograph FILM" shall include soundtrack and any recording however made of a sequence of visual images which is capable of being used as a means of showing that sequence as a moving picture (whether or not joined to or part of a record as defined herein) provided that it shall only include such recordings as aforesaid as are used for presentation through cinema, theatrical or television transmission or diffusion media or by any guage of film derived from such recordings so presented and shall not include any such recordings as are used for presentation in any other manner whatsoever. "performance" shall include speech dialogue monologue recitation acting singing playing an instrument or instruments conducting or directing either alone or with another or others or any other sound and visual effects of any kind. "performance" shall include speech dialogue monologue recitation acting singing playing an instrument or instruments conducting or directing either alone or with another or others or any other sound and visual effects of any kind. "producer's FILM" shall mean all cinematograph films commenced and/or under production during the period of this agreement and the extension (s) (if any) thereof whether or not the production thereof may have been completed after the expiry of this agreement, which contain performance of any work (s) in respect of which the producer directly or indirectly : (i) is or shall be the producer or owner or (ii) otherwise owns or controls or shall own or control the right to make available licence and assign the rights granted to the company under this agreement. "contract RECORDINGS" shall mean recordings of performances comprising the Producer's Films whether or not they are incorporated in the final versions of the producer's films. "contract WORKS" shall mean all works of a literary dramatic or musical nature performed in contract recordings ( 3 ) (A) The producer hereby assigns and transfers and agrees to assign and transfer to the company absolutely and beneficially for the world : (i) the copyright for making records of all contract works which are made available to the company under the terms of this agreement and the copyright, performing right and all other rights title and interest in and to the literary dramatic and musical works embodied in the Producer's Films including all rights of publication, sound and television broadcasting, public performance and mechanical reproduction of the said works. (ii) the sole and exclusive right to make or authorise the making of any record embodying the contract recordings, either alone or together with any other recordings. The producer undertakes to execute or obtain the execution of such further assignments or assurances as may be required to safeguard the parties' rights. (B) It is hereby declared that the rights hereby assigned and transferred or agreed to be assigned and transferred in pursuance of this agreement include but are not limited to : (i) the sole right of production reproduction sale (under such trade marks as the company may select) use and public performance (including sound and television broadcasting) throughout the world by any and every means whatsoever of records made in pursuance of this agreement. (ii ) the sole right to decide based on market demand whether and /or when to discontinue or recommence the said production and sale of records and to fix and alter the prices of such records and the irrevocable right and licence at all times to use and publish the names and photographs of artistes, musicians, lyric writers, music directors and other persons associated with and/or engaged in the Producer's Films in any manner whatsoever and the producer's trademarks and logos for labelling, cataloguing, promoting and marketing the said records. (iii) the right to grant licences for publication, sound and television broadcasting, public performance and mechanical reproduction of the contract works or any of them, (iv) the right of use and public performance (including sound and television broadcasting) throughout the world by every means whatsoever of the contract works or any of them. and the company shall have the irrevocable right to authorise any other person, firm or corporation to do any and all such act and things ( 4 ) THE producer hereby assures the company: (a) That the copyright and other rights as mentioned in clause 3 are or will be the Producer's film and unencumbered property immediately prior to their assignment or transfer to the company. (b)That prior to the despatch of soundtrack or recorded tape thereof or any other materials considered necessary to be made available to the company under this agreement the Producer will have secured the consent in writing of all artistes, musicians, lyric writers, music directors and other persons associated with and/ or engaged in the Producer's Films in any matter whatsoever together with all other consents necessary for the manufacture and sale of the records and the use and publication by the company and its licensees of the names including professional names (if any) and photo-copies of the artistes, musicians, lyric writers, music directors and other persons for trade and advertising purposes as aforesaid for the purpose of this agreement. (c) That except as otherwise expressly provided herein the company shall be under no liability whatsoever to any of the said artistes or musicians or lyric writers or music directors or to any other third party arising out of the company's exercise of any of its rights under this agreement 8. (c) That except as otherwise expressly provided herein the company shall be under no liability whatsoever to any of the said artistes or musicians or lyric writers or music directors or to any other third party arising out of the company's exercise of any of its rights under this agreement 8. The company shall be the owner of the original plate within the meaning of the Copyright Act, 1957 and any extensions or modifications thereof of any performance from which any records are manufactured in pursuance of this agreement. 9. The producer: (a) shall not directly or indirectly supply or make available to any individual firm company corporation or other person for the purposes of manufacturing and selling records the whole or any part of the sound track or recorded tape thereof or any other materials made or to be made available to the company under this agreement. (b) shall not directly or indirectly provide the service of any of the said artistes and / or musicians to perform any of the works performances of which have been made available to the company for the purpose of manufacturing and selling records hereunder on their own account or for any individual firm company corporation or other person other than the company whereby such sound track (s) and performances are or are intended to be recorded in any form from which a record may be offered to the public provided that such sound track (s) and performances by the said musicians can be made available for sound or television broadcasting or cinematograph films in cases in which records thereof are not and are not intended to be offered to the public except by or with the prior written consent of the company. (c) shall not do any act which derogates from the grants to the company in this agreement or exercise any rights granted to the company in this agreement 10. The producer shall not without the prior written consent of the company : (a) assign all or any of the Producer's rights or obligations whatsoever under this agreement or (b) appoint an agent to collect on the Producer's behalf any monies due under the provisions of this agreement 11. The producer shall not without the prior written consent of the company : (a) assign all or any of the Producer's rights or obligations whatsoever under this agreement or (b) appoint an agent to collect on the Producer's behalf any monies due under the provisions of this agreement 11. The producer agrees that all rights and obligations under this agreement shall be construed to apply to works included or to be included in Producer's Films commenced and / or under production during the period of this agreement 12. (A) Subject as hereinafter mentioned the Producer shall be entitled in respect of all records made in pursuance of this agreement (excluding records for promotional purposes) and sold by the company and its licensees in any part of the world are not returned to a royalty calculated on the company's domestic dealer price per record (excluding any taxes levied or leviable in respect of such sale by the company and its licensees and then less a packaging allowance at 10% on disc records in single-fold sleeves, 20% on tape records and 30% on disc records in deluxe packaging and/or in double-fold sleeves) at the following rates : (a) on a record reproducing : (i) contract recordings alone 71/2% (seven and a half per cent) per record. (ii) contract recordings together with other recordings a proportion of 71/2% (seven and a half per cent) per record according to the number of duration of other recordings. (b) The producer shall also be entitled to additional royalty in respect of records sold by the company, but not by its licensees calculated as follows :. (i) when the total value of records sold by the company appearing in the producer's royalty statement during a half-year exceeds Rs. 2-1/5 lakhs but does not exceed Rs. 10 lakhs - 1 % (one per cent) of total half-yearly sales value on the basis of the company's domestic dealer price. (ii) when the total value of records sold by the company appearing in the producer's royalty/ statement during a half-year exceeds Rs. 10 lakhs 1 1/2% (one and a half per cent) of total half-yearly sales, value on the basis of the company's domestic dealer price. For arriving at the total half yearly dealer value proportionate value will be taken where contract recordings are combined in a record with other recordings. 10 lakhs 1 1/2% (one and a half per cent) of total half-yearly sales, value on the basis of the company's domestic dealer price. For arriving at the total half yearly dealer value proportionate value will be taken where contract recordings are combined in a record with other recordings. (B) Records manufactured for the company outside India on a custom pressing basis but intended by the company primarily for sale in India shall for the purpose of this clause 12 be considered as having been manufactured in India and to have been sold when sold by the company, similarly records manufactured other than by the company for any of its licensees outside the country in which such licensee has its main operating office may be deemed to have been manufactured in such country and to have been sold when sold by such licensee. (C) In addition to the royalty provided for in clause 12 (A) hereof the producer shall also be paid on all inclusive copyright royalty at the rate of 5% (five per cent) in respect of sales by the company and its licensees of records companies performances of contract works and the provisions of clause 12 (A) shall apply to the calculation of such copyright royalty. (D) Royalty as above shall be payable as long as records covered by the agreement continue to be sold by the company and/or its licensees, but not beyond the period for which the copyright in records and in contract works is legally protested in each country in which such records are sold. 15. Within six months after the end of each half-year the company shall furnish to the producer a statement showing the latest information received by the company for such half-yearly period as to the number of records sold (after making any permissible deductions as aforesaid ) and the amount of royalty due in respect thereof and subject to the provisions of clause13 hereof the company shall pay such amount to the producer or the producer's agent appointed under clause 10 of this agreement and such payment shall be a complete discharge of the company's liability to make payments hereunder. The producer shall at the expense of the producer be entitled to receive upon so requesting the company in writing a certificate of the company's auditors as to the correctness of any such statement. 17. The producer shall at the expense of the producer be entitled to receive upon so requesting the company in writing a certificate of the company's auditors as to the correctness of any such statement. 17. The producer without prejudice in the producer's responsibilities and obligations hereunder hereby nominates constitutes and appoints the company as the producer's attorney to bring and conduct in such form and manner as to the company may seen reasonable any legal proceedings whatever in the name of the company against any person for the purpose of enforcement of the provisions of this agreement or against any person who has committed anything whereby the company's rights and interests under this agreement are adversely affected provided that the authority hereby granted may be exercised by any Director or Secretary of the Company or by any Officer of the Company duly authorised for the purpose. "the expressions "producer" and "company" referred to in the aforementioned clauses respectively mean the defendant No. 1 and the plaintiff 2. In this interlocutory application made in an action for infringement and permanent injunction the plaintiff has contended that it manufactured records and cassettes relating to the said film and has further contended, though incorrectly, that it had paid royalty to the defendant No. 1. In paragraph 4 of the petition it was contended that under the agreement the plaintiff is an assignee of the copyright of all works of literary, dramatic or musical nature in the said film and is the owner of the copyright therein within the meaning of the Copyright Act, 1957. It was also contended in the said paragraph that the plaintiff is the owner of the original plate of the records and cassettes of the songs and music of the said film. It was contended in paragraph 5 of the petition that in or about last week of November, 1995 the plaintiff came to learn that cassettes containing literary, dramatic and musical works of the said film were being released in the market by the respondent No. 2 and/or the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 by copying from the recording of the plaintiff. It was also contended in the said paragraph that the defendant Nos. 3 and 4 are claiming to be partners of the defendant No. 2. 3 and 4 by copying from the recording of the plaintiff. It was also contended in the said paragraph that the defendant Nos. 3 and 4 are claiming to be partners of the defendant No. 2. In paragraph 6 of the petition it was contended that defendant No. 1 after having received the benefit of the said agreement by receiving royalty thereunder from the plaintiff has purported to authorise the defendant Nos. 2 to 4 to manufacture and sell works and music of which the plaintiff is the owner of the copyright. In paragraph 7 it was contended that the acts and conducts of the defendants amount to infringement of the copyright of the plaintiff 3. In the plaint the plaintiff has prayed for permanent injunction, mandatory injunction, delivery up and destruction of the records, cassettes, tapes etc. produced by the respondents. In this application interlocutory reliefs have been prayed for in aid of the main reliefs 4. The application was moved on 19th December, 1995 upon notice to the defendants, when it was pointed out by the defendant No. 1 that no royalty whatsoever had been paid by the plaintiff to the defendant No. 1. The Court thereupon recorded respective submissions of the parties and passed the following order:"in my view, at this stage there appears to be substance in the submission of the respondent No. 1 viz. that the case sought to be argued is different from the case which the petitioner has pleaded in the petition. Besides the statement contained in paragraphs 3 and 6 regarding payment of royalty appears not to be wholly correct. On the last occasion when the matter was listed before this Court, the point being taken regarding non-payment of royalty, the petitioner sought for time to produce evidence of such payment. The matter was accordingly adjourned till today for production of such evidence after one extension. Today no such evidence has been produced. The matter has been sought to be argued on the assumption that no royalty has been paid. It is also conceded that an amount of approximately Rs. 27,000/- was payable by the petitioner to the respondent No. 1 and the petitioner stated that interim relief could be granted to the petitioner subject to making payment of such amount either by deposit in Court or to the respondent No. 1. It is also conceded that an amount of approximately Rs. 27,000/- was payable by the petitioner to the respondent No. 1 and the petitioner stated that interim relief could be granted to the petitioner subject to making payment of such amount either by deposit in Court or to the respondent No. 1. In my view, the petitioner having come with what appears to be a false case on oath in the petition, at the ad interim state it should not be entitled to any relief without giving the respondents an opportunity of filing an affidavit. Accordingly the prayer for ad interim relief is refused. Directions are given for affidavits as follows :-Affidavit-in-opposition is to be filed by 5-11996; Affidavit-in-reply is to be filed by 8-1-1996; and the matter will appear in the list as 'specially fixed' matter on 9-1-1996. " ( 5 ) TWO affidavits-in-opposition, one on behalf of the defendant No. 1 and the other on behalf of the defendant No. 2 where thereupon filed. In the affidavit filed on behalf of the defendant No. 1, the said defendant contended that the plaintiff has made untrue allegations on oath in the petition, and as such has disentitled itself to any relief at the interlocutory stage. It has also been contended that the plaintiff has not taken any step against marketing and sale of pirated cassettes of the musical works of the said film published by one power electronic since 1992. In support of the said contention in lay cards of such pirated audio cassettes were annexed to the said affidavit. It was then contended that the plaintiff has failed to give any explanation in regard to the inordinate delay in filing the instant suit and application ( 6 ) ON merits the defendant No. 1 has contended in the said affidavit that the agreement dated 21st August, 1986 was in reality an agreement to assign and cannot be construed as anything more than a licence granted to the plaintiff to manufacture and sell records containing the musical works of the said film in which the copyright is and was at all material times vested in the defendant No. 1. It was stated that the defendant No. 1 did not ever intend and did not ever assign its copyright in all works of literary, dramatic and musical nature performed in the said film in favour of the plaintiff without consideration. It was stated that the defendant No. 1 did not ever intend and did not ever assign its copyright in all works of literary, dramatic and musical nature performed in the said film in favour of the plaintiff without consideration. It was stated that there could be no assignment as claimed by the plaintiff without consideration. Alternatively, it was contended that if it is held that there has been an assignment, the plaintiff cannot claim any right on the basis of the said agreement as the terms and conditions contained therein are harsh to the defendant No. 1 and the plaintiff has delayed in publication of the concerned works. In support of the contention that the defendant No. 1 intended to grant a licence, copy of a letter dated 25th August, 1986 was annexed to the petition. It was stated that on receipt of the said letter the plaintiff represented that an agreement is required to be entered into, whereupon the defendant No. 1 had subscribed its signature on a document without the blank spaces contained therein being filled in. It was the specific case of the defendant No. 1 that no copy of the said document was ever furnished to it. It was also the specific case of the defendant No. 1 that by filling up the said document the plaintiff has introduced the agreement dated 21st August, 1986. It was stated that the plaintiff at that time had a monopoly in the business of producing records and cassettes. It was stated that the defendant No. 1 did not obtain any independent advice with regard to the terms and conditions of the said agreement and it had no option in the matter by reason of the superior bargaining power and dominant position of the plaintiff vis-a-vis the defendant No. 1. It was thereupon stated that the agreement is illegal, null and void and in any event voidable and the defendant No. 1 has avoided the same or is avoiding the same. It was thereupon stated that the agreement is illegal, null and void and in any event voidable and the defendant No. 1 has avoided the same or is avoiding the same. It was lastly contended that the agreement contains reciprocal promises which were not performed, and as the consideration for the same has wholly failed and therefore no effect can be given to the same ( 7 ) ON the factual score it was contended in the said affidavit by the defendant No. 1 that only some statements were submitted under cover of letters dated 25th November, 1991, 9th September, 1991 and 7th July, 1992, copies whereof were annexed to the petition. It was stated that no payment was made on the basis of the said statements. It was stated that subsequent to the institution of the suit and after passing of the order dated 19th. December, 1995, five more statements were sought to be submitted by the plaintiff to the defendant No. I under cover of a letter dated 26th December, 1995 along with a cheque for Rs. 27,450 / -. A copy of the said letter was also annexed to the said affidavit. It was stated that the defendant No. 1 has under cover of a letter dated 2nd January, 1996 duly returned the said cheque and the statements to the plaintiff. A copy of the said letter was also annexed to the said affidavit. It was stated that in the first week of September, 1995 the defendant No. 1 agreed to grant licence to the defendant No. 2 for sale of the audio works in the said film on the terms and conditions contained in a letter dated 19th September, 1995, a copy whereof was also annexed to the said affidavit. It was stated that an advertisement was issued in the daily issue of the Bartaman, dated 14th September, 1995 inviting objections. A copy of the said advertisement was also annexed to the said affidavit. It was stated that inspite of such advertisement no objection was received from any person including the plaintiff. It was then contended that thereafter the defendant No. 2 released cassettes in the market. The in-lay cards relating to the same were annexed to the said affidavit. A copy of the said advertisement was also annexed to the said affidavit. It was stated that inspite of such advertisement no objection was received from any person including the plaintiff. It was then contended that thereafter the defendant No. 2 released cassettes in the market. The in-lay cards relating to the same were annexed to the said affidavit. It is the specific case of the defendant No. 1 that after release of such cassettes by the defendant No. 2 the present suit was filed ( 8 ) IN the affidavit, filed on behalf of the defendant No. 2 it was contended that in the first week of September, 1995 the defendant No. 2 approached the defendant No. 1 for assignment and sale of exclusive copyright to publish, sale and market the audio cassettes and C. D. of the said film, whereupon the defendant No. 1 asked the defendant No. 2 to ascertain whether the copyright has been assigned to any other or not. It was stated that in order to ascertain the same a public notice was published in the Bengali daily newspaper Bartaman on 14th September, 1995. It was then contended that despite publication of such advertisement none came forward with any objection and in that view of the matter on 19th September, 1995 the defendant No. 1 assigned the copyright of the said film for 7 years in favour of the defendant No. 1. It was then contended that the defendant No. 2 did not publish, sale or market any audio cassettes or C. D. till 28th October, 1995 and on the same date the defendant No. 2 informed the defendant No. 1 that till that date the defendant No. 2 has not received any objection from any person in spite of the said public notice and therefore, the defendant No. 2 was planning to release the audio cassettes on the first week of November, 1995. It was thereupon contended that before finally publishing or releasing the cassettes in the market the defendant No. 2 gave a letter to the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Detective Department. Lal Bazar, on 23rd November, l995. A copy of the said letter was annexed to the said affidavit. It was lastly contended that the defendant No. 2 released audio cassettes containing only the dialogue portion along with some background music of the said film. Lal Bazar, on 23rd November, l995. A copy of the said letter was annexed to the said affidavit. It was lastly contended that the defendant No. 2 released audio cassettes containing only the dialogue portion along with some background music of the said film. The defendant No. 2 has however, not indicated the date of release of the said audio cassettes. It was contended that the plaintiff's audio cassettes contain songs of the said film and not dialogues. It was stated that the defendant No. 2 received Master Audio Spool from the defendant No. 1 and the defendant No. 2 produced the cassettes by recording the same from the Master Audio Spool of the said film. It was contended that therefore, the defendant No. 2 has not got anything from the plaintiffs cassettes ( 9 ) THE plaintiff filed an affidavit-in-reply dealing with both the affidavits-in-opposition of the defendants Nos. 1 and 2. In the said affidavit it was contended that the defendant No. 1 divested itself of all its rights pursuant to assignment of its copyright, which is in three parts, namely, copyright in literary, dramatic and musical works embodied in the film, copyright in the original plate and copyright in records, cassettes, disc and like manufactured and sold by the plaintiff. It was stated that the defendant can only have a money claim against the plaintiff but the assignment of the copyright was absolute. It was thereafter stated that the plaintiff furnished royalty statements till about the year 1991 and in December, 1995 discovered that royalty payments were outstanding. It was stated that the plaintiff duly forwarded cheque for the outstanding amount of royalty and in doing so acted bona fide and in good faith but the cheque has been returned by the defendant No. 1. It was contended that in late 80s' and early 90s' the plaintiff went through serious financial crisis which resulted in cutting down the strength of staff and workmen of the plaintiff. It was stated that the plaintiff became a sick company within the meaning of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provision) Act 1985 and was referred to the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (BIFR ). It was stated that the plaintiff became a sick company within the meaning of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provision) Act 1985 and was referred to the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (BIFR ). It was stated that an operating agent was appointed by BIFR and various rehabilitation schemes were explored and during that period the books, records and documents of the plaintiff were time and again under scrutiny by various agencies and due to that payment of royalty to the defendant No. 1 had been missed and over-looked by reason of inadvertence. It was contended that the suit was filed in extreme haste and immediately upon notice of the fact that the cassettes of the said film have been released by the defendants and by reason thereof the fact that no payment had been made on account of royalty to the defendant No. 1 had been overlooked. The plaintiff expressly apologised therefor ( 10 ) IN the said affidavit-in-reply it was stated that the preparation of the original plate by the plaintiff was duly acknowledged by the defendant No. 1 by a letter dated 25th August, 1986, a copy of which was annexed to the said affidavit. It was stated that by and under cover of a letter dated 12th November, 1986, which was sent by registered post with acknowledgement due, a copy of the agreement dated 21st August, 1986 was sent to the defendant No. 1 by the plaintiff. A copy of the said letter and a copy of the said postal acknowledgement due card was annexed to the said affidavit. It was stated that in the issue of the advertisement or notice, the admission of the defendant No. 1 that it had no right in respect of the literary, dramatic and musical works of the said film is implicit. It was stated that the said advertisement was not noticed by the plaintiff. It was stated that the plaintiff had no knowledge of any piracy of cassettes of musical works of the said film apart from those by the defendants. It was stated that the defendant Nos. 1 and 2 are colluding with each other and therefore no reliance should be placed in regard to the documents manufactured by them. It was stated that the plaintiff had no knowledge of any piracy of cassettes of musical works of the said film apart from those by the defendants. It was stated that the defendant Nos. 1 and 2 are colluding with each other and therefore no reliance should be placed in regard to the documents manufactured by them. It was stated that the letter dated 23rd November, 1995 addressed to the Police Authorities by the defendant No. 2 would show that the plaintiff has come to Court at the earliest available opportunity and has been vigilant about its rights ( 11 ) MR. Sudipta Sarkar, learned Counsel, appearing in support of the application, drew my attention to various sections of the Copyright Act, 1957. Mr. Sarkar also drew my attention to Halsbary's Laws of England, 4th Edition, Vol. 6, Articles 15 and 37 and Section 130 of the Transfer of Property Act. He cited a judgment of the House of Lords in Messager v. Brigish Broadcasting Co. Ltd. , reported in (1929) AC 151. He also cited it judgment of the Court of Appeal in Chaplin v. Leslie Frewin Publishers Ltd. , reported in (1965) 3 All ER 764. Mr. Sarkar then cited the judgment in Jonathan Cape Ltd. v. Consolidated Press Ltd. , reported in (1994) 3 All ER 253. Mr. Sarkar also cited a judgment of the House of Lords in Withers v. Nethersol, reported in (1948) 1 All ER 400. He also drew my attention to Order 39, Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 and Kerr on Injunction, 6th Edition, pages 660 to 661. While giving reply, Mr. Sarkar cited a judgment of the Division Bench of the Punjab High Court in Dharam Dutt v. Ram Lal, reported in AIR 1953 Pandh 279. Mr. Sarkar also drew my attention to para 15. 15 of Copinger, 13th Edition ( 12 ) MR. Sarkar submitted that copyright is not an ordinary right. He contended that copyright is a chose in action or an actionable claim and is a property capable of being transferred. He submitted that one can divest himself of his right in such a property by actually making over the same to another. He submitted that once it is made over, the person making over ceases to have any right over the same. Mr. He submitted that one can divest himself of his right in such a property by actually making over the same to another. He submitted that once it is made over, the person making over ceases to have any right over the same. Mr. Sarkar submitted that this kind of property can be transferred by assignment which requires to be made in writing. He submitted that this assignment can be made against consideration or without consideration. He submitted that such assignment can be effected on a promise to pay the consideration in future. According to him once the right is assigned the property does not revert back for failure of consideration, whether paid simultaneously or promised to be paid in future. He submitted that in order to find out whether the assignment has been made or the same is proposed to be made one has to look at the writing. He submitted that looking at the writing, in this case the said agreement, it will appear that the defendant No. 1 has assigned his copyright absolutely in favour of the plaintiff for ever. He then submitted that the defendant No. 1 may have a legitimate claim for royalty but non-payment of royalty will not have the effect of reassessment and the document does not say that on non-payment of royalty the copyright will revert back to the defendant No. 1. He submitted that by looking at the document it will be abundantly clear that the intention was to assign immediately without reserving any right. Mr. Sarkar submitted that after 23rd November, 1995 attempt was being made to release pirated records and cassettes of the said film by the defendants. The suit was filed in December, 1995 itself and simultaneously therewith the present application was filed and therefore, there had been no delay on the part of the plaintiff which will disentitle the plaintiff to the reliefs sought for in the application. He also submitted that there was a mistake in the petition relating to payment of royalty, but that, he submitted, was not a deliberate mistake and the reason therefore has been explained by his client in the affidavit-in-reply. He also submitted that there was a mistake in the petition relating to payment of royalty, but that, he submitted, was not a deliberate mistake and the reason therefore has been explained by his client in the affidavit-in-reply. He submitted that if his client was not really under bona fide mistake, his client could immediately prior to the institution of the suit send the statements and the cheque which were sent by his client after detection of the mistake subsequent to the institution of the suit upon the same having been pointed out by the defendant No. 1. Mr. Sarkar submitted that despite his client being the sole and absolute owner of the copyright was not granted an ad interim injunction as a penalty for such mistake. He submitted that no further penalty should be imposed on his client for such mistake inasmuch as his client is the owner of the copyright and if anyone without his clients consent exploits the copyright in the market the same will cause irretrievable prejudice to this client which cannot be compensated in money. Mr. Sarkar submitted that his client being the