2007 PLP 1442 (CLD)
Messrs TAJ COMPANY LIMITED through General Manager — Petitioner Versus Haji AHMAD JAN and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2007 PLP 1442 (CLD) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Sardar Muhammad Raza Khan and Tassaduq Hussain Jillani, JJ |
| Parties | Messrs TAJ COMPANY LIMITED through General Manager — Petitioner Versus Haji AHMAD JAN and others — Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2007 PLP 1442 (CLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2007 PLP 1442 (CLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Sardar Muhammad Raza Khan and Tassaduq Hussain Jillani, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2007 PLP 1442 (CLD) (Messrs TAJ COMPANY LIMITED through General Manager — Petitioner Versus Haji AHMAD JAN and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Abdur Rauf Rohaila, Advocate Supreme Court, Muhammad Naazar Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and M.A. Qureshi, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners (In all cases).
- Muhammad Yousaf Kazmi, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondent (In C.P. No.1394-L of 2003).
- Nemo for Respondent (in C.Ps. Nos.1392-L, 1393-L and 1395-L of 2003).
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 10, 9 & 39
Held, in order to avail such monopoly in the manuscript and to claim exclusive copyright thereof, it must have somewhere been got registered under the provisions of copyright law
Where there was no document on record indicative of the fact that manuscript used by the publisher had ever been registered in accordance with law and if any such document ever existed in favour of the publisher and not placed on record, the claim of publisher was liable to be rejected on this score alone.
S. 28
Protection of typography and term of protection
Scope
Held, even if the publisher had any right in the typographic arrangement of the editions of publication, it was to subsist for a period of twenty fine years from the beginning of the calendar year next following the year in which the edition was first published
Where there was no evidence on record, which palpably seemed to have been suppressed, as to when the script was first published because such printing had remained in vogue for many decades even beyond twenty fine years, no case of copyright involvement had been made out in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
SARDAR MUHAMMAD RAZA KHAN, J.
All these petitions involving common questions of law and fact and common judgment, are taken up together. Taj Company Limited which, according to learned counsel, is named after liquidation as Taj Company (Pvt.) Limited and is so prayed to be substituted, seeks leave to appeal from the judgment dated 7-4-2003, passed by learned Lahore High Court in Intra Court Appeal, whereby, the appeal was dismissed in limine, upholding the judgment dated 11-6-2001 of a learned Judge in chambers, dismissing the writ petition.
2. Taj Company is engaged, inter alia, in the job of printing and publishing the Holy Qur'an. It claims that it has a peculiar manuscript in which the Holy Qur'an is being printed for decades and that no other printer or publisher, like the respondent, had the right to use such manuscript.
3. In order to avail such monopoly in the manuscript and to claim exclusive copyright thereof, it must have somewhere .been got registered under the provisions of copy right Laws. There is no document on record indicative of the fact that the Qur'anic manuscript used by Taj Company had ever been registered in accordance with law. If any such document ever existed in favour of the petitioner and if not placed on record, the petitions, as per law laid down by this Court in cases of Noor Khan 1984 SCMR 681 and Ch. Abdul Ghani 1988 SCMR 390, are liable to be dismissed on this score alone.
4. Both the forums of .the learned High Court have dismissed the claim under section 28 of the Copyright Ordinance, 1962 which for facility of reference is reproduced:-- "
28. Protection of typography and term of protection.
The publisher of edition of a work shall enjoy the rights to authorize the making, by any photographic or similar process, of copies, intended for sale in commerce, of the typographical arrangement of the edition, and such right shall subsist until twenty-five years from the beginning of the calendar year next following the year in which the edition was first published."
5. It was held that even if the .petitioner had any right in the typographic arrangement of the Editions of the Holy Qur'an, it was to subsist for a period of twenty-five years from the beginning of the calendar year next following the year in which the Edition was first published. There is not an iota of evidence on record, which palpably seems to have been suppressed, as to .when the script was first published. The matter seems to have been suppressed because such printing has remained in vogue for many decades even beyond twenty-five years. No case of copyright involvement has been made out.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner red out before us section 18 onward of the Copyright Ordinance, 1962 but failed to convince as to how all these were relevant in his case and for the petitioner's benefit. In -the circumstances, no exception could be taken to the conclusion arrived at by the learned High Court. The petitions being merit-less, all are hereby, dismissed and leave declined. M.B.A./T-7/SC Petitions dismisse