JUDGMENT : (Prayer: Civil Suit filed under Order IV Rule I of the O.S.Rules Read with Section 7 of the Commercial Courts, Commercial Appellate Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act, 2015(4 of 2016) read with Section 55, 62(2) of the Copyrights Act and Order VII Rule I of C.P.C. praying for the following: a) For a declaration, declaring the plaintiff is the sole and absolute copyright owner in respect of telecasting 11 Tamil films more fully set out in the schedule of list hereunder through cable, cable TV, Cable TV Channel, Set Top Box, etc. throughout the area of entire Tamil Nadu as contemplated in the agreement entered into between the plaintiff and the third defendant. b) For a permanent injunction restraining the defendants their men, servants, agents, etc. from in any manner interfering or infringing the copyright owned by the plaintiff in respect of telecasting 11 movies more fully set out in the schedule of list hereunder through cable, cable TV, Cable TV Channel, Set Top Box, etc. throughout the area of entire Tamil Nadu as contemplated in the agreement entered into between the plaintiff and the third defendant. c) cost of the suit.) 1. The suit is filed in the year 2018 for the relief of declaration and permanent injunction in respect of the copyright over the films enlisted in the schedule to the plaint. 2. After completion of the pleadings, this Court framed issues on 19.11.2019 and directed the parties to marshal their witnesses before the Master for recording evidence. Case management schedule was drawn on 13.12.2019. According to the said case management schedule, the proof affidavit of the witness (PW-1) ought to have been filed on or before 06.01.2020. For some reason or other, the plaintiff had not shown any interest in completing the trial. On 10.02.2020, when the matter was reverted back to the Court by the Additional Master, this Court passed the following order: “After fixing the date under Case Management Schedule for examination of witnesses, the learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff has filed a memo before the Additional Master-III that the matter may be posted before the Additional Master-I, since connected suit in C.S.No.200 of 2019 between the same plaintiff and the contested defendants is pending. Hence, the Additional Master-III sent back the file to the Court for further orders. 2. Hence, the Additional Master-III sent back the file to the Court for further orders. 2. The parties are directed to file their dates convenient for them for examining the witnesses to enable this Court to fix the date for trial. 3. Post the matter under the caption for Case Management Hearing on 17.03.2020.” 3. Thereafter, again the case was listed before the court for the parties to file fresh case management schedule. This Court time and again adjourned the case for the plaintiff to file fresh case management schedule. On 03.08.2018, this Court made clear that if the plaintiff fails to come out with fresh case management schedule, the suit will be dismissed for default. 4. The order of this Court dated 03.08.2021 is extracted below only to record the conduct of the plaintiff. “Learned counsel for the plaintiff was directed to file fresh case management schedule vide order dated 05.07.2021. Inspite of granting a month’s time, the plaintiff has not come forward with fresh case management schedule. It is to be noted that earlier, this Court fixed the Case Management Schedule as early as on 13.12.2019, for the plaintiff to lead evidence from 06.01.2020. However, on that date and subsequent hearings, no progress in recording evidence but at the request of the plaintiff counsel to list the matter before the learned Additional Master I for recording evidence, the matter was reverted back to this Court. 2. In the light of the above fact, this Court records that if the plaintiff fails to come out with his fresh case management schedule, the suit will dismissed for default. Call the matter on 11.08.2021.” 5. The plaintiff approached this Court invoking commercial division jurisdiction but least respect shown by him to the timeline prescribed under the Act. On 11.08.2021, the schedule was refixed and case was sent to Additional Master. As per the revised schedule, the plaintiff was supposed to complete the examination of witnesses on her side by 09.09.2021. The plaintiff failed to complete the examination of witness by 09.09.2021. 6. Without completing the examination of witness, the plaintiff sought extension of time on 14.09.2021. The plaintiff was permitted to continue the examination of witnesses and date for examination of witness was again refixed vide order dated 14.09.2021. As per the said order, examination of witnesses on either side ought to have been completed by 30.09.2021. 6. Without completing the examination of witness, the plaintiff sought extension of time on 14.09.2021. The plaintiff was permitted to continue the examination of witnesses and date for examination of witness was again refixed vide order dated 14.09.2021. As per the said order, examination of witnesses on either side ought to have been completed by 30.09.2021. However, till date, the plaintiff has not completed the examination of P.W.1. 7. The learned Master from 20.09.2021 till 30.09.2021 adjourned the proceedings for the reasons recorded and the same is extracted below again to show the conduct of the plaintiff: “20.09.2021 Listed today. Plaintiff counsel is present. D4 witness is not present as directed. Fourth defendant counsel is present. No witness is also present for plaintiff as directed dated 11.8.2021 and 14.9.2021 respectively. For evidence if any call on 23.09.2021. 23.09.2021 Listed today. Plaintiff counsel is present. D4 counsel is present. Witness is not present. At request for evidence call on 24.9.2021. 24.09.2021 Listed today. Plaintiff counsel is present. PW1 addl. proof affidavit is filed. Ex.P3 marked (with objection) 4th defendant counsel is present and is not ready to cross examine the witness. For cross of PW1 and the evidence of defendant side if any as directed and as requested by both call on 28.9.2021. No proof affidavit filed by the defendant. 28.9.2021 Listed today. Plaintiff counsel is present. PW1 witness is not present till 4.30 p.m. D4 counsel is present. No proof affidavit filed by the D4 as directed. For the appearance of PW1 and for the evidence of D4 if any call on 29.9.2021. 29.09.2021 Listed today. Plaintiff counsel is present. PW1 is not present for cross. Defendant counsel also not present. No proof affidavit filed by the defendant as directed. For evidence of D4, as instructed call on 30.9.2021. 30.09.2021 Listed today. Plaintiff counsel is present. Witness PW1 is not present for cross and also D4 counsel is not present. No proof affidavit filed by the D4 as directed. In view of the direction as mentioned thereon P.B.C.” The above extracts clearly proves that the plaintiff out of 6 hearings except for the hearing dated 24.09.2021, on all other hearings, the witness conveniently remained absent. 8. Witness PW1 is not present for cross and also D4 counsel is not present. No proof affidavit filed by the D4 as directed. In view of the direction as mentioned thereon P.B.C.” The above extracts clearly proves that the plaintiff out of 6 hearings except for the hearing dated 24.09.2021, on all other hearings, the witness conveniently remained absent. 8. This Court cannot show any more indulgence or lenience to the litigant who has come to this Court just for the sake of harassing the defendant and nor really interested in pursuing her right by mounting the witness box. It is clear case of abuse of court process. Hence, the suit is dismissed for default with costs of Rs.5000/- payable to the contesting fourth defendant.