JUDGMENT : 1. The suit falls under the Indian Copyright Act, 1957. 2. The plaintiff, as a part of their business, purchased copyrights of the movies from the producers or the copyright holders for the exclusive copyright in respect of the World Satellite Television Broadcast, Direct to Home Broadcast, Direct Satellite Service, Terrestrial Television Broadcast and all other rights connected therewith including exhibition of the films by means of wireless diffusion and by wire for communication to the public through Television Broadcast and as such, the exclusive copyrights vests with the plaintiff for broadcasting the films through Satellite Television Broadcast, Direct to Home Broadcast, Internet, VCD, DVD, Inflight, Airborne, Terrestrial Television Broadcast, through cable/via cable TV wire wireless or through any other forms, means and modes, including all channels of Doordarshan without restriction of geographical area. 3. The plaintiff is the exclusive copyright holder of the Telegu Cinematography film “PISTHA”, which has been obtained from the first defendant, by an agreement dated 18.06.2009, which is marked as Ex.P2. The second defendant had authorized the fourth defendant to deliver the sound and picture negatives to the plaintiff and the fourth defendant had given a confirmation letter dated 19.06.2009 to the plaintiff in this regard, which is marked as Ex.P3. 4. According to the plaintiff, under Ex.P2, dated 18.06.2009, the first defendant had assigned the sole and exclusive world satellite right for broadcasting the said films “PISTHA” including any satellite system (Indian or Foreign) satellite broadcasting service, Public service Broadcasting service, Cable Television service, Internet, D.V.B.H, Direct to Home service, Pay T.V., Pay Review service, Radio, Diffusion, MMDS, Local delivery service, Video, Cable, I.P.T.V. Wire, Wireless or through any other T.V. Media or any other system without any restriction of Geographical area for a valuable consideration for a perpetual period. Thus, according to the plaintiff, the exclusive rights vested only with the plaintiff. 5. The plaintiff states that the third defendant infringed the copyright of the film “PISTHA” by making CDs', DVDs' and selling it to the open market. The first and second defendants are the copyright holders and producer of the film “PISTHA” and hence, they have committed an offence punishable under Section 69 of the Copy Right Act. 6. 5. The plaintiff states that the third defendant infringed the copyright of the film “PISTHA” by making CDs', DVDs' and selling it to the open market. The first and second defendants are the copyright holders and producer of the film “PISTHA” and hence, they have committed an offence punishable under Section 69 of the Copy Right Act. 6. It is the case of the plaintiff that the first and second defendants, as producers of the said film, had categorically denied the assignment of the world satellite rights to the third defendant as claimed. Therefore, the plaintiff was constrained to file the present suit for declaration of his limited copyrights and for a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering or infringing the plaintiff's limited copyrights. 7. Though notice was served on the defendants as early as on 07.02.2011, 09.03.2011 and 11.03.2011 respectively, they were not represented, either in person or through counsel. Hence, they were set ex-parte on 21.07.2014. 8. The plaintiff has produced the agreement dated 18.06.2009 between the plaintiff and the first defendant under Ex.P2. A perusal of this document go to show that the plaintiff has got exclusive rights of the said film “PISTHA”. As alleged by the plaintiff, the third defendant has been infringing the exclusive copyright of the plaintiff, the suit has been filed for declaration, permanent injunction and for damages. 9. Though it has been averred in the plaint that the plaintiff had suffered loss of Rs.25,00,100/- due to the alleged infringement, absolutely there is no evidence, either oral or documentary, in respect of the same. As the defendants have not come forward to prove that they have also got the copyrights of the said film “PISTHA”, the claim of the plaintiff is proved in respect of prayer (i) and (ii). 10. Accordingly, the suit is decreed, as prayed for, with respect to prayer (i) and (ii) viz., declaration and permanent injunction only and in respect of prayer (iii) for damages, the suit is negatived. No costs. Consequently, connected applications are closed.