: 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL NO.264 OF 2005 IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO.3381 OF 2004 IN SUIT NO.3282 OF 2004 Mr.Praveen Khanna ....Appellant V/s. M/s.Bombino Video Pvt.Ltd. & Ors. ....Respondents None for the Appellant. Mr.Thakore i/b Thakore Jariwala & Co. for the Respondents. CORAM : A.P. SHAH AND S.J. VAZIFDAR, JJ. DATED : 28TH MARCH, 2005. P.C. : . The Appellant and his advocate are absent. 2. Heard the counsel for the Respondents. The only question is whether cable rights are given to Respondent Nos.1 and 2 under the relevant agreement. We have gone through the relevant terms of the agreement and especially clause 1 (c) (iii) whereby the right to ‘distribution’, ‘broadcast’ of the said film is defined to mean exploitation of such right in part or full in any manner whatsoever by use of video : 2 : format via any medium, method and/or technology whatsoever and manner (now known or hereinafter invented or discovered). Clause (ix) is to the same effect. Having considered the wile language in which clauses 1 (c) (iii) and (ix) are worded, it is difficult to accept the Appellant’s contention that cable rights are not covered by the agreement. 3. Appeal is dismissed.