IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 2ND DECEMBER 2011 / 11TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 OP(C).No. 3946 of 2011(O) ------------------------- OS.3/2009 of II ADDL.DISTRICT COURT,ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER(S): -------------------- INDIAN PERFORMING RIGHTS SOCIETY LTD., REGISTERED OFFICE AT 208, GOLDEN CHAMBERS, NEW ANDHERI LINK ROAD, ANDHERI (WEST), OSHIWARA MUMBAI – 400 050 AND HAVING ITS ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE AT 109, G.N.CHETTY ROAD, T. NAGAR, CHENNAI – 600 017, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED PERSON SHRI SHIBUMON N.A. BY ADV. SRI.S.SREEKUMAR, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.DEEPU THANKAN SMT.G.RANJITA SMT.SONIA GEORGE RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. MATHRUBHOOMI PRINTING AND PUBLISHING COMPANY LTD. MINI MUTHOOT TOWERS, 15TH FLOOR, COCHIN 17 REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. 2. CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER FOR CLUB FM 94.3, MATHRUBHOOMI PRINTING AND PUBLISHING COMPANY LTD. MINI MUTHOOT TOWERS, 15TH FLOOR, COCHIN 17 THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: OP(C) NO.3946/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE IA NO.5878/2011 IN OS NO.3/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE 2ND ADDL. DISTRICT COURT, ERNAKULAM DATED 25.11.11 EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE TYPED COPY OF ORDER IN IA NO.5878/11 IN OS 3/2009 PASSED BY THE 2ND ADDL. DISTRICT COURT, ERNAKULAM DATED 26.11.11 EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE IA NO.5979/2011 IN OS NO.3/2009 SEEKING ENLARGEMENT OF TIME BEFORE THE ADDL.DISTRICT COURT, ERNAKULAM DATED 30.11.11 //TRUE COPY// THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- O.P.(C) No.3946 of 2011 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of December, 2011. JUDGMENT Plaintiff in O.S.No.3 of 2009 and defendant in O.S.No.48 of 2008 of the court of learned Additional District Judge-II, Ernakulam is the petitioner before me seeking extension of time to produce certified copy of membership register of petitioner. 2. Dispute concerns copy right over a musical work and its alleged infringement. Petitioner filed O.S.No.3 of 2009 claiming that it has exclusive copy right over the musical work. Respondent filed O.S.No.48 of 2008 claiming that permission of petitioner is not required to broadcast the said musical work. I am told that recording of evidence in the cases is over. While so, petitioner filed I.A.No.5878 of 2011 to re-open the evidence to enable him produce the above said document. Since the said document was produced in a court at Calcutta, learned Additional District Judge was inclined to grant time to the petitioner till 07.12.2011 to produce copy of the document. 3. Difficulty of petitioner stated by learned Senior Advocate is that since the application for certified copy of the document could be filed only on 24.11.2011, it may take some time to get the copy and produce the same before the learned Additional District Judge. Petitioner requires time till 31.12.2011 for OP(C)No.3946/2011 2 the said purpose. It is submitted that petitioner has filed Ext.P3, application before learned Additional District Judge requesting to extend time till 31.12.2011. 4. Since Ext.P3, application is pending before the learned Additional District Judge it has to be considered by the learned Additional District Judge. Learned Additional District Judge has already permitted petitioner to re-open the evidence to adduce further evidence as production of the document was found necessary and has granted time till 07.12.2011 to produce the document. Certainly learned Additional District Judge has to consider the difficulty of petitioner in producing the document within that time and consider the request for extension of time made in Ext.P3 application. I must bear in mind that the request is only for extension of time till 31.12.2011. Of course these are matters which the learned Additional District Judge has to take into account while considering Ext.P3, application. Resultantly this Original Petition is disposed of with a direction to the learned Additional District Judge-II, Ernakulam to consider the difficulties expressed by petitioner while deciding Ext.P3, application. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks