{"id":195850,"date":"2005-03-29T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2005-03-28T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-prasad-film-laboratories-vs-g-v-films-limited-on-29-march-2005"},"modified":"2017-05-06T01:24:29","modified_gmt":"2017-05-05T19:54:29","slug":"ms-prasad-film-laboratories-vs-g-v-films-limited-on-29-march-2005","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-prasad-film-laboratories-vs-g-v-films-limited-on-29-march-2005","title":{"rendered":"M\/S. Prasad Film Laboratories vs G.V. Films Limited on 29 March, 2005"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">M\/S. Prasad Film Laboratories vs G.V. Films Limited on 29 March, 2005<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS           \n\nDated: 29\/03\/2005 \n\nCoram \n\nThe Hon'ble Mr. Justice P. SATHASIVAM   \nand \nThe Hon'ble Mr. Justice S.K. KRISHNAN  \n\nOriginal Side Appeal No. 52 of 2005\nand \nC.M.P.No. 532 of 2005 \n\n\nM\/s. Prasad Film Laboratories,\n58, Arunachalam Road,  \nChennai-600 093. .. Appellant.\n\n-Vs-\n\n1. G.V. Films Limited,\n   represented by its Director\n   P. Raghuraman,\"Sujatha Centre\",\n   No.4, Seshadri Road,\n   Alwarpet, Chennai-18.\n\n2. Photo Film Industries,\n   B-134-137 Pipdic Industrial Estate,\n   Mettupalayam, Pondicherry-605 009. \n\n3. Mr. Jaswand Chand alias \n   Jaswant Bandari,\n   20, Errulappan Street,\n   Chennai-79.\n\n4. Vijay Bajaj\n   Devi Distributors,\n   231, Pantheon Road,\n   Egmore, Chennai-8.\n\n5. Anand Cine Service,\n   3, Sarangapani Street,\n   T. Nagar, Chennai-17.\n\n6. Jeeva,\n   F 105, G3 Golden Brooke Apartment, \n    Anna Nagar, Chennai-102.\n\n7. Laila,\n   604, Spring Leaf Apartment,\n   7, Bungalows Road, Andheri (West),\n   Versova, Mumbai-500 061. \n\n8. Film Employees Federation of South India,\n   36, Jawaharlal Nehru Salai, 100 ft.Road,\n   Vadapalani, Chennai-26.\n\n9. Chennai Chengai MGR Districts Film \n   Distributors Association,\n   26, Meeran Sahib Street,\n   Chennai-2.\n\n10. Thotta Tharani,\n    8, 4th Main Road, United India Colony,\n    Kodambakkam, Chennai-24.  \n\n11. S. Somasundaram,  \n    Proprietor SM Films, 5 West Avani Moola Street,\n    1st Floor, Madurai, 625 001.\n\n12. Shree Pavornicka Movies, \n    20, Erukkadu Third Street,\n    Karuvampalayam, \n    Mangalam Road, Tirupur-641 604.\n\n13. G. Tech Stones Limited,\n    62, 1st Floor, GN Chetty Road,\n    T. Nagar, Chennai-17.\n\n14. Mohan Alse, \n   77, M.S. Koil Street, Royapuram,\n   Chennai-13.\n\n15. Oscar Films P. Ltd.,\n    9, 10th Avenue, Ashok Nagar,\n    Chennai-83.\n\n16. J.V.M. Publicity,\n    75, General Patters Road,\n    Chennai-2.\n\n17. Mrs. Anees, \n    F-105, G-3 Golden Brooke Apartment,\n    Anna Nagar, Chennai-600 102.\n\n18. Five Star Trading,\n    represented by its partner\n    M. Mohd. Yahiya,\n    73\/175, Purasawakkam High Road,  \n    Chennai-7. .. Respondents.\n\n\n        Original Side Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent read with\nOrder XXXVI, Rule 1 of Original Side Rules, against order dated 25th February,\n2005, made in  Original  Application  No.  789 of 2004 in C.S.No.  749 of 2004\npassed by Single Judge of this Court.\n\n!Mr.  Srinivasa Raghavan,senior counsel for\nM\/s.Subhashini Narasimhan:- For Appellant. \n\n^Mr.  K.  Ravi for M\/s.Rugan and Arya:- For\n1st Respondent \n\n:JUDGMENT   \n<\/pre>\n<p>(Judgment of the Court was made by P.  SATHASIVAM, J.,)   <\/p>\n<p>        The above Original Side Appeal has been filed against Order of learned<br \/>\nSingle Judge dated 25-2-2005 made in O.A.No.  789 of 2004 in C.S.No.   749  of<br \/>\n2004  in  and  by  which  the  learned  Judge  appointed  the first respondent<br \/>\ntherein\/appellant herein and the counsel for the fourth respondent therein  as<br \/>\nJoint Receivers  for  the  Tamil  Film  &#8220;Ullam Ketkkume&#8221;.  The plaintiff\/first<br \/>\nrespondent herein, namely, G.  V.  Films, instituted Civil Suit No.   749\/2004<br \/>\non the file of the Original Side of this Court against the appellant herein as<br \/>\nfirst defendant and 17 others praying for permanent injunction restraining the<br \/>\ndefendants  from interfering with the absolute Copyright of the plaintiff over<br \/>\nthe Tamil cinematograph film, &#8220;Ullam Ketkkume&#8221; by preventing in any manner the<br \/>\nrelease and exploitation of the said film.  The plaintiff has also prayed  for<br \/>\nmandatory  injunction  directing  the  first  defendant  laboratory to deliver<br \/>\nprints of the Tamil cinematograph film &#8221; Ullam Ketkkume&#8221; to the  plaintiff  or<br \/>\nsuch  other persons named by this Court notwithstanding any claim by the first<br \/>\ndefendant or any other defendants and subject to any condition that this Court<br \/>\nmight impose for keeping of an account of all realisations from exploiting the<br \/>\nsaid film and preserving such realisations intact separately till  the  claims<br \/>\nof all the defendants herein are adjudicated upon.\n<\/p>\n<p>        2.  In the said suit the plaintiff has also filed Original Application<br \/>\nNo.  789 of 2004 praying for appointment of joint receivers, one of whom could<br \/>\nbe a representative of the applicant\/ plaintiff company and the other could be<br \/>\na  representative  of the respondents, to take charge of the negatives and all<br \/>\nthe 72 number of positive prints  of  the  Tamil  cinematograph  film,  &#8220;Ullam<br \/>\nKetkkume&#8221;  from  the  first respondent&#8217;s laboratory, book appropriate theatres<br \/>\nall over Tamil Nadu, release such prints in  such  theatres,  submit  to  this<br \/>\nCourt accounts of all collections from exploitation of such prints and deposit<br \/>\nsuch  collections  every  week  into this Court after deducting taxes, theatre<br \/>\nrent and lawful expenses involved in exploiting the  picture  subject  to  the<br \/>\nresult of and pending disposal of the suit.  The said Application was resisted<br \/>\nby  the first respondent therein\/appellant herein by filing counter affidavit.<br \/>\nBy the impugned order dated 25-2-2005 , the learned Judge,  after  considering<br \/>\nthe  claim of both parties, particularly taking of the fact that the financial<br \/>\nposition  of  the  petitioner\/plaintiff  and  of  the  fact   that   all   the<br \/>\nrespondents\/defendants  who  are  creditors entitled payment more particularly<br \/>\nthe  first  defendant  laboratory  got  lien  over  others,  passed  an  order<br \/>\nappointing the first  respondent-Prasad  Film Laboratories and Mr.  P.  Jerome<br \/>\nPushparaj, counsel for 4th respondent therein as joint receivers for the Tamil<br \/>\nFilm &#8220;Ullam Ketkkume&#8221; and also issued certain other directions for  exhibition<br \/>\nof the said film in 72 theatres and keep the collection by filing statement of<br \/>\nthe  Court  and posted the said application to 14-6-2 005 for further hearing.<br \/>\nQuestioning the said order, Prasad Film Laboratories\/first respondent therein,<br \/>\nhave filed the above appeal.\n<\/p>\n<p>        3.  Heard Mr.  Srinivasa Raghavan,  learned  senior  counsel  for  the<br \/>\nappellant and Mr.    K.    Ravi,  learned counsel for first respondent in this<br \/>\nAppeal.\n<\/p>\n<p>        4.  Even at the outset, it was brought to the notice  of  the  learned<br \/>\nsenior counsel  for the appellant that Original Side Appeal No.  37\/2005 filed<br \/>\nby Photo Film Industries,  Pondicherry\/2nd  respondent  in  that  Application,<br \/>\nfiled  against  the  very  same  order  has  been  dismissed  by this Court on<br \/>\n11-3-2005.  In that decision, after finding that the  course  adopted  by  the<br \/>\nlearned  Judge  is  reasonable and acceptable and also taking note of the fact<br \/>\nthat the appointment of Joint Receivers to exhibit the film &#8220;Ullam Ketkume&#8221; is<br \/>\nonly for a limited period and posted O.A.No.789\/2004 for  further  hearing  on<br \/>\n14-6-2005, we dismissed  the  said  appeal.  However, Mr.  Srinivasa Raghavan,<br \/>\nlearned senior counsel for the appellant, would contend that in spite  of  the<br \/>\ndismissal  of  O.S.A.No.37\/2005 and confirmation of the very same order of the<br \/>\nlearned Single Judge dated 25-2-2005, the appellant herein  who  stands  in  a<br \/>\ndifferent footing is entitled to challenge the same.  According to him, though<br \/>\nthe  learned  Judge has applied Section 94 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the<br \/>\nsame has not been properly applied in this case.  Since the plaintiff  has  no<br \/>\nlegal right  or  cause  of  action to continue the suit.  He further contended<br \/>\nthat the plaintiff has not performed his  obligation  and  has  not  satisfied<br \/>\nSections 15  and  16  of  the Specific Relief Act, 1963.  He further contended<br \/>\nthat as per Section 170 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, the appellant herein<br \/>\nis entitled to lien over others.  According  to  him,  the  plaintiff  is  not<br \/>\nentitled  to  any benefit in view of Sections 64 and 65 of the Indian Contract<br \/>\nAct.  He further contended that when the suit is liable to be  dismissed,  the<br \/>\nCourt cannot re-write the terms of contract and grant relief by appointment of<br \/>\na joint receiver.  On the other hand, Mr.  K.  Ravi, learned counsel appearing<br \/>\nfor  the first respondent, contended that the learned Single Judge considering<br \/>\nthe claim of all the parties, including Bailees lien of the appellant  herein<br \/>\nover  others,  passed an workable interim order which requires no interference<br \/>\nby this Court.  He also contended that the negative of the film will  be  with<br \/>\nthe  appellant  and  even  the order appointing joint receiver was made on the<br \/>\nconsent given by the appellant by filing a memo.  We have considered  all  the<br \/>\nrelevant materials and the rival contentions.\n<\/p>\n<p>        5.   In  order  to  appreciate  the rival contentions, it is useful to<br \/>\nrefer the interim arrangement made by the learned Judge which reads as under:-\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;4.  Accordingly the following order is passed:\n<\/p>\n<p>The first respondent and the counsel for the fourth respondent  Mr.    Jerome<br \/>\nPushparaj  are  appointed  as  joint  receivers  for  the  Tamil  film  Ullam<br \/>\nKetkkume, the applicant\/plaintiff  shall  spend  a  sum  of  Rs.10  lakhs  in<br \/>\neffecting  necessary advertisements in the name of the joint receivers for the<br \/>\nrelease of the film  in  Tamil  language  in  the  State  of  Tamil  Nadu  and<br \/>\nPondicherry;  the applicant shall select good theatres for release of the film<br \/>\nall oover Tamil Nadu and Pondicherry and place it before the  joint  receivers<br \/>\nfor  their approval and selection; the joint receivers shall release 72 prints<br \/>\nof the film in all the 72 theatres so  approved  by  them,  which  prints  are<br \/>\nalready  ready  in  the  custody of the first respondent\/laboratory; the joint<br \/>\nreceivers shall realise the collections from such release and deposit the same<br \/>\nin a Nationalised Bank in a separate account to be  opened  in  the  names  of<br \/>\njoint  receivers;  such  deposit  shall  be after deduction of tax and theatre<br \/>\nrents, if any post release publicity is needed, on intimation from  the  joint<br \/>\nreceivers,  the  applicant  shall  bring  the  necessary  fund  to  meet those<br \/>\nexpenditures as well; the applicant  shall  have  a  priority  claim  for  the<br \/>\nreimbursement  of  the  money spent by him on pre release publicity and post r<br \/>\nelease publicity of the picture from and out of the collections at the time of<br \/>\ndisbursement; the joint receivers are entitled to withdraw such sum  of  money<br \/>\nfrom the amount in deposit to defray any reasonable and lawful expenses, which<br \/>\nthey  may incur towards the release of the film, which would include wages for<br \/>\nrepresentatives as may be appointed by them for all  the  theatres  where  the<br \/>\npicture  is  released; the 18th respondent, who holds a concluded contract for<br \/>\nexploiting the picture in overseas territories can take the prints at his cost<br \/>\nfrom  the  first  respondent\/  laboratory  for  export  purposes   only;   the<br \/>\ndisbursement  of  any amount from such collection either towards reimbursement<br \/>\nof the expenses incurred by the applicant towards  pre  release  publicity  or<br \/>\npost release publicity and return of the amount to any of the defendants shall<br \/>\nwait  further  orders  from this Court; on the applicant meeting the necessary<br \/>\nexpenses, the joint receivers shall  permit  the  applicant  to  add  a  small<br \/>\nnegligible  missing  portion  of  the  film  in  the prints already available,<br \/>\nsubject to the condition that he pays the actual cost of that process  to  the<br \/>\nfirst respondent\/laboratory; the joint receivers shall arrange for the release<br \/>\nof  the  film  within  eight  weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this<br \/>\norder and the remuneration of the joint receivers shall be decided  later  on.<br \/>\nCall this application on 14-6-2005.<br \/>\nThough  vehement  argument  was  made  by  the  learned senior counsel for the<br \/>\nappellant by pointing out the power of civil court under Section 9  4  C.P.C.,<br \/>\nprovisions  from Specific Relief Act (Sections 15 and 16), Sections 64, 65 and<br \/>\n170 of Indian Contract Act, 1872, as rightly observed by  the  learned  Judge,<br \/>\nunless  the  film  is exhibited and money is collected, no claim including the<br \/>\npriority claim of the appellant can be settled.  We  are  satisfied  that  the<br \/>\nlearned  Judge  while  passing  the  interim  arrangement  by appointing joint<br \/>\nreceivers was conscious of the above statutory  provisions  and  in  order  to<br \/>\nmitigate  the  burden  of the plaintiff and also by protecting the interest of<br \/>\nall creditors, more particularly the  appellant  laboratory,  made  the  above<br \/>\narrangement.  The  order  impugned  is  not a final one.  As a matter of fact,<br \/>\neven the learned Judge himself has posted the said application for appointment<br \/>\nof receivers to 14-6-2005 for further hearing.  Inasmuch as the learned  Judge<br \/>\nhas  not  rejected  the  claim of the applicant and the present order has been<br \/>\nmade as an interim arrangement, we are  not  inclined  to  interfere  at  this<br \/>\nstage.   The  appellant is free to raise all contentions with reference to the<br \/>\nabove mentioned provisions including &#8220;bailee&#8217;s particular lien&#8221; under  Section<br \/>\n170 of  the Indian Contract Act when O.A.No.  789\/2004 is taken up for hearing<br \/>\non 14-6-2005.  It is also relevant to note that as pointed out by the  learned<br \/>\ncounsel for the first respondent, the negatives will be with the appellant and<br \/>\neven  the said arrangement, namely, appointing joint receivers was made at the<br \/>\ninstance of all the parties, including the appellant who has not disputed  the<br \/>\nfact of filing a memo before the learned Single Judge.  As rightly observed by<br \/>\nthe Division Bench of  this  Court  in  R.M.   Subbiah Vs.  N.  Sankaran Nair,<br \/>\nreported in AIR 1979 Madras p.56, the picture  that  has  been  picturised  on<br \/>\ncelluloid,  it  would  not be conducive in equity or in the name of justice to<br \/>\nkeep such a completed picture in the shelves of a laboratory without the  same<br \/>\nbeing exploited  for  the benefit of both the parties.  It is also relevant to<br \/>\nnote that the learned Judge has not permitted the  plaintiff  to  receive  the<br \/>\nmoney to be realised by the joint receivers.  As pointed out by the appellant,<br \/>\nthey are entitled lien over others, we hope and trust that the said claim will<br \/>\nbe decided by the learned Judge considering the report of the joint receivers.<br \/>\nIn  the  light  of  our conclusion and of our earlier order dated 11-3-2005 in<br \/>\nO.S.A.No.  37 of 2005,  we  are  not  inclined  to  admit  the  above  appeal.<br \/>\nAccordingly, the same is dismissed with the above observation.  No costs.  The<br \/>\nconnected C.M.P., is also dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>R.B.\n<\/p>\n<p>Index:- Yes<br \/>\nInternet:- Yes<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court M\/S. Prasad Film Laboratories vs G.V. Films Limited on 29 March, 2005 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated: 29\/03\/2005 Coram The Hon&#8217;ble Mr. Justice P. SATHASIVAM and The Hon&#8217;ble Mr. Justice S.K. KRISHNAN Original Side Appeal No. 52 of 2005 and C.M.P.No. 532 of 2005 M\/s. Prasad Film Laboratories, [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-195850","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>M\/S. Prasad Film Laboratories vs G.V. Films Limited on 29 March, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-prasad-film-laboratories-vs-g-v-films-limited-on-29-march-2005\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"M\/S. Prasad Film Laboratories vs G.V. Films Limited on 29 March, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-prasad-film-laboratories-vs-g-v-films-limited-on-29-march-2005\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2005-03-28T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-05-05T19:54:29+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"11 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-prasad-film-laboratories-vs-g-v-films-limited-on-29-march-2005#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-prasad-film-laboratories-vs-g-v-films-limited-on-29-march-2005\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"M\\\/S. Prasad Film Laboratories vs G.V. Films Limited on 29 March, 2005\",\"datePublished\":\"2005-03-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-05-05T19:54:29+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-prasad-film-laboratories-vs-g-v-films-limited-on-29-march-2005\"},\"wordCount\":1877,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madras High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-prasad-film-laboratories-vs-g-v-films-limited-on-29-march-2005#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-prasad-film-laboratories-vs-g-v-films-limited-on-29-march-2005\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-prasad-film-laboratories-vs-g-v-films-limited-on-29-march-2005\",\"name\":\"M\\\/S. Prasad Film Laboratories vs G.V. Films Limited on 29 March, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2005-03-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-05-05T19:54:29+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-prasad-film-laboratories-vs-g-v-films-limited-on-29-march-2005#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-prasad-film-laboratories-vs-g-v-films-limited-on-29-march-2005\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-prasad-film-laboratories-vs-g-v-films-limited-on-29-march-2005#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"M\\\/S. Prasad Film Laboratories vs G.V. Films Limited on 29 March, 2005\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"M\/S. Prasad Film Laboratories vs G.V. Films Limited on 29 March, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-prasad-film-laboratories-vs-g-v-films-limited-on-29-march-2005","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"M\/S. Prasad Film Laboratories vs G.V. Films Limited on 29 March, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-prasad-film-laboratories-vs-g-v-films-limited-on-29-march-2005","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2005-03-28T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-05-05T19:54:29+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"11 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-prasad-film-laboratories-vs-g-v-films-limited-on-29-march-2005#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-prasad-film-laboratories-vs-g-v-films-limited-on-29-march-2005"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"M\/S. Prasad Film Laboratories vs G.V. Films Limited on 29 March, 2005","datePublished":"2005-03-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-05-05T19:54:29+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-prasad-film-laboratories-vs-g-v-films-limited-on-29-march-2005"},"wordCount":1877,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madras High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-prasad-film-laboratories-vs-g-v-films-limited-on-29-march-2005#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-prasad-film-laboratories-vs-g-v-films-limited-on-29-march-2005","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-prasad-film-laboratories-vs-g-v-films-limited-on-29-march-2005","name":"M\/S. Prasad Film Laboratories vs G.V. Films Limited on 29 March, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2005-03-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-05-05T19:54:29+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-prasad-film-laboratories-vs-g-v-films-limited-on-29-march-2005#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-prasad-film-laboratories-vs-g-v-films-limited-on-29-march-2005"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-prasad-film-laboratories-vs-g-v-films-limited-on-29-march-2005#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"M\/S. Prasad Film Laboratories vs G.V. Films Limited on 29 March, 2005"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/195850","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=195850"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/195850\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=195850"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=195850"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=195850"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}