w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



Nandagopal Chetty & Another v/s Sunil & Others


Company & Directors' Information:- SUNIL & CO PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U32109WB1984PTC037810

    C.S. No. 159 of 2014 & O.A. No. 180 of 2014

    Decided On, 05 February 2020

    At, High Court of Judicature at Madras

    By, THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE G. JAYACHANDRAN

    For the Plaintiffs: E. Senthilkumar, Advocate. For the Defendants: Set Exparte.



Judgment Text


(Prayer: This Civil Suit is filed under Section 55 and 62 of the Indian Copyright Act 1957 read with Order IV Rule 1 O.S. Rules and Order VII Rule 1 Civil Procedure Code 1 and 2 of Civil Procedure Code 1908 as amended, praying for (a) for a declaration that the second plaintiff is the absolute owner of the absolute entire World Negative rights by permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their men, agents, servants anybody on their behalf or assigns from in any manner from infringing the copy rights and the exclusive rights assigned to 2nd plaintiff by deed of assignment dated 01.10.2013 of the suit picture (picture and sound) Dubbing and Remaking Rights in all languages along with its copy right of 35 mm and 16 mm commercial and non-commercial, theatrical, nontheatrical rights, Television rights in all Channels including National, Regional, Metro, Channels 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and its satellite and entertainment channels, satellite Television broadcasting rights, private communication, broadcasting, cable TV, Pay TV, Pay per view TV, Pay on Demand, Direct to Home, Direct to user rights, MMDS, Video on Demand, Wire, Wireless, IPTV, CCTV, airborne, highseas, rail borne, surface, transport rights, All India Radio, FM Private Radio Broadcasting, Audio/DC rights, Video copyrights including VCD, LD, DVD, Mini-HD, Blue Ray, Mp4, HDCD, Internet/Web Technology, broadband rights, mobile, microchip, ringtone rights, portal rights and by form of communication like signs, signals, writing, pictures, images and sounds of all kinds by transmission of electromagnetic waves through space or through cables intended to be received by general public directly or indirectly through medium of relay stations and all electric and electronic rights of present and future inventions in the entire world including India of the said cinematograph film for a perpetual period of Ninety nine years commencing from the date of the agreement being 01.10.2013; b) by permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their men, agents, servants, or their representatives, anybody on their behalf or assigns from in any manner from infringing the copyrights and exclusive rights assigned to the 2nd plaintiff by deed of assignment dated 01.10.2013 in respect of the suit picture “POONILAMAZHA” Malayalam Colour scope starring Prasanth, Thilagam and others directed by Mr.Sunil, and also including the entire World Negative rights (picture and sound) Dubbing and Remaking Rights in all languages along with its copy right of 35 mm and 16 mm commercial and noncommercial, theatrical, non-theatrical rights, Television rights in all Channels including National, Regional, Metro, Channels 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and its satellite and entertainment channels, satellite Television broadcasting rights, private communication, broadcasting, cable TV, Pay TV, Pay per view TV, Pay on Demand, Direct to Home, Direct to use rights, MMDS, Video on Demand, Wire, Wireless, IPTV, CCTV, airborne, highseas, rail borne, surface, transport rights, All India Radio, FM Private Radio Broadcasting, Audio/DC rights, Video copyrights including VCD, LD, DVD, Mini-HD, Blue Ray, MP4, HDCD, Internet/Web Technology, broadband rights, mobile, microchip, ringtone rights, portal rights and any form of communication like signs, signals, writing, pictures, images and sounds of all kinds by transmission of electromagnetic waves through space or through cables intended to be received by general public directly or indirectly through medium of relay stations and all electric and electronic rights of present and future inventions in the entire world including India of the said cinematograph film for a perpetual period of Ninety nine years commencing from the date of the agreement being 01.10.2013, and c) directing the defendants 1 and 2 to pay the damages of Rs.5,00,000/- together with interest at the rate of 24% per annum from the date of plaint till the date of realisation, caused to the plaintiffs by illegally telecasting the suit picture “POONILAMAZHA” and thereby caused the infringement of copy rights of the suit picture ““POONILAMAZHA”).

1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the plaintiffs.

2. The suit is filed for the following reliefs:

(a) for a declaration that the second plaintiff is the absolute owner of the absolute entire World Negative rights by permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their men, agents, servants anybody on their behalf or assigns from in any manner from infringing the copy rights and the exclusive rights assigned to 2nd plaintiff by deed of assignment dated 01.10.2013 of the suit picture (picture and sound) Dubbing and Remaking Rights in all languages along with its copy right of 35 mm and 16 mm commercial and non-commercial, theatrical, nontheatrical rights, Television rights in all Channels including National, Regional, Metro, Channels 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and its satellite and entertainment channels, satellite Television broadcasting rights, private communication, broadcasting, cable TV, Pay TV, Pay per view TV, Pay on Demand, Direct to Home, Direct to user rights, MMDS, Video on Demand, Wire, Wireless, IPTV, CCTV, airborne, highseas, rail borne, surface, transport rights, All India Radio, FM Private Radio Broadcasting, Audio/DC rights, Video copyrights including VCD, LD, DVD, Mini-HD, Blue Ray, Mp4, HDCD, Internet/Web Technology, broadband rights, mobile, microchip, ringtone rights, portal rights and by form of communication like signs, signals, writing, pictures, images and sounds of all kinds by transmission of electromagnetic waves through space or through cables intended to be received by general public directly or indirectly through medium of relay stations and all electric and electronic rights of present and future inventions in the entire world including India of the said cinematograph film for a perpetual period of Ninety nine years commencing from the date of the agreement being 01.10.2013;

b) by permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their men, agents, servants, or their representatives, anybody on their behalf or assigns from in any manner from infringing the copyrights and exclusive rights assigned to the 2nd plaintiff by deed of assignment dated 01.10.2013 in respect of the suit picture “POONILAMAZHA” Malayalam Colour scope starring Prasanth, Thilagam and others directed by Mr.Sunil, and also including the entire World Negative rights (picture and sound) Dubbing and Remaking Rights in all languages along with its copy right of 35 mm and 16 mm commercial and non-commercial, theatrical, non-theatrical rights, Television rights in all Channels including National, Regional, Metro, Channels 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and its satellite and entertainment channels, satellite Television broadcasting rights, private communication, broadcasting, cable TV, Pay TV, Pay per view TV, Pay on Demand, Direct to Home, Direct to use rights, MMDS, Video on Demand, Wire, Wireless, IPTV, CCTV, airborne, highseas, rail borne, surface, transport rights, All India Radio, FM Private Radio Broadcasting, Audio/DC rights, Video copyrights including VCD, LD, DVD, Mini-HD, Blue Ray, MP4, HDCD, Internet/Web Technology, broadband rights, mobile, microchip, ringtone rights, portal rights and any form of communication like signs, signals, writing, pictures, images and sounds of all kinds by transmission of electromagnetic waves through space or through cables intended to be received by general public directly or indirectly through medium of relay stations and all electric and electronic rights of present and future inventions in the entire world including India of the said cinematograph film for a perpetual period of Ninety nine years commencing from the date of the agreement being 01.10.2013,

and c) directing the defendants 1 and 2 to pay the damages of Rs.5,00,000/- together with interest at the rate of 24% per annum from the date of plaint till the date of realisation, caused to the plaintiffs by illegally telecasting the suit picture “POONILAMAZHA” and thereby caused the infringement of copy rights of the suit picture ““POONILAMAZHA”.

3. The brief facts narrated in the plaint is that 1st plaintiff is in the business of film financing, producing pictures and distributing the same. The 2nd plaintiff is the assignee of the right in “POONILAMAZHA”, Malayalam Movie which the 1st plaintiff has acquired the copy rights from its producer by a letter dated 10.01.1997. While the copy right is held by the 2nd plaintiff through the 1st plaintiff, the 2nd defendant herein has telecasted the Movie in the Channel during the month of October 2013 without any authority or right. Hence the plaintiffs as well as the 3rd defendant issued notice to the 2nd defendant not to telecaste the Movie in their Channel, but the notice did not evoke any response. Hence the present suit has been filed for declaration, permanent injunction and for damages as stated above.

4. Despite notice, there was no representation on behalf of the defendants. Hence, they were set exparte.

5. The plaintiffs to prove their case have filed the proof affidavit and marked Exhibits P1 to Ex.P10. Ex.P1 is the letter issued by the producer/1st defendant to the 3rd defendant/Gemini Colour Laboratory acknowledging the financial liability with the plaintiffs and the ownership of the negatives of the said Movie (Malayalam) colour scope with the plaintiff. The relevant passage indicating the undertaking found in Paragraph Nos.4 and 5 are extracted below:

4. We have undertaken that in lieu of the finance arrangement Mr.Nandagopal Chetty, Madras, will be owners of the negatives, its lease and exploitation rights, dubbing and remake rights, telecasting and Video rights and their realisations, royalty collections, revenue and all the attendant benefits, and they will also be permitted to conclude sale of ownership rights of the said picture, its lease and exploitation rights for the entire World and such arrangement as entered into by them will be fully binding on us without demur.

5. They are irrecovably permitted to handle the negatives for the purposes of completing the picture, employ technicians and artists and also to release the picture, without any further reference to us and all their acts committed to the above effects will be fully binding on us.

6. On the very same day, the 3rd defendant/Gemini Colour Laboratory has also confirmed the right of the 1st plaintiff over the said Movie. In the said confirmation letter, the 3rd defendant has specifically informed the plaintiffs that the 1st defendant has given an undertaking that he shall not enter into any other contract with any other Laboratory, in respect of the above named picture nor shall create any charges or any encumbrance on the negatives.

7. Contrary to this undertaking, the 1st defendant has permitted the 3rd defendant to telecast the Movie in the Channel. Ex.P3 is the deed of assignment entered into between the 1st plaintiff and the 2nd plaintiff on 01.10.2013, assigning the copy right held by the 1st plaintiff in favour of the 2nd plaintiff. Therefore, the plaintiffs have joined together to lay the suit. The letter sent by the plaintiffs and the 3rd defendant to the 2nd defendant to desist from telecasting the Movie in the Channel are marked as Ex.P5 and Ex.P8 respectively. Neither the 1st defendant nor the 2nd defendant has responded to these notices. In the said circumstances, the learned counsel for the plaintiffs would pray that the suit may be allowed as per the relief sought.

8. On a perusal of the Exhibits P1 to P10 relied by the plaintiffs, this Court finds there was a contract between the 1st defendant and the 1st plaintiff. Pursuant to that, the Lab letter has been given by the 1st defendant to the 3rd defendant recognizing the negative rights vest with the 1st plaintiff. The said negative right has been assigned by the 1st plaintiff in favour of the 2nd plaintiff as per the the assignment deed dated 1.10.2013. Nowhere in the Lab letter, the consideration has been mentioned. However, in the assignment Ex.P3, this Court finds that the consideration for the assignment of the world negative right and all copy rights held by the 1st plaintiff in the Movie “ POONILMAZHA” is shown as Rs.50,000/-. Therefore, though the plaintiffs have sought damages of Rs

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

.5,00,000/- in the suit, infact, the consideration for the Movie right as per the assignment was only Rs.50,000/-. That apart, the documents relied by the learned counsel for the plaintiffs does not indicate whether the 3rd defendant has telecasted the Movie and if so, on which date, the 3rd respondent telecasted the Movie. In the absence of material evidence to prove the said fact, the 2nd defendant cannot be held liable for any damage whatsoever. 9. As a result, the suit is partly allowed and the plaintiff is entitled for the relief of declaration and permanent injunction as prayed for. As far as the damage and loss is concerned, though the plaintiffs have claimed Rs.5,00,000/-, material evidence indicates that the consideration for the said Movie copy right was only Rs.50,000/-. Therefore, if at all he has incurred loss by telecasting the Movie in the 2nd defendant's Channel without permission, he is entitled only to a sum of Rs.50,000/-. Therefore, the claim of damage is restricted to Rs.50,000/- and decree is passed accordingly. 10. In the result, the suit is partly allowed. Prayer (a) and (b) allowed. Prayer(c) restricted to Rs.50,000/- with interest at the rate of 24% per annum from the date of plaint till the date of realisation. The plaintiff is also entitled for the costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
O R







Judgements of Similar Parties

24-08-2020 B. Sunil Kumar & Another Versus Cochin University of Science & Technology, Rep. by Its Registrar & Others High Court of Kerala
21-08-2020 Sunil Kumar Bishnoi Versus Union of India & Others High Court of Punjab and Haryana
14-08-2020 Sunil Chillalshetti & Others Versus State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Medical Education Department, Chhattisgarh & Another High Court of Chhattisgarh
13-08-2020 Sunil Agrawal Versus Chhattisgarh Environment Conservation Board, Through its Chairman, Naya Raipur (C.G.) & Others High Court of Chhattisgarh
23-07-2020 Sunil Rathee & Others Versus The State of Haryana & Others Supreme Court of India
23-07-2020 Sunil N. Godhwani Versus State High Court of Delhi
13-07-2020 M/s. Vismaya Advertising, Ernakulam, Represented by Its Manager Sunil S. Menon & Another Versus The Intelligence Officer (IB), Department of Commercial Taxes, Mattancherry at Aluva & Others High Court of Kerala
07-07-2020 Sunil Yadavrao Beedkar Versus The Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad
07-07-2020 Kamla Nehru Educational Society Thru Secy. Shri Sunil Dev & Others Versus State of U.P. Thru Secretary Housing & Urban Planning & Others High Court Of Judicature At Allahabad Lucknow Bench
03-07-2020 K.J. Sunil Versus State of Kerala, Represented by The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam & Another High Court of Kerala
01-07-2020 Ishwar Chander & Another Versus Sunil Saran High Court of Punjab and Haryana
01-07-2020 Sree Gokula Chit & Finance Co (Pvt.) Ltd Versus Sunil Sabu High Court of Kerala
30-06-2020 Sunil Raj, Corrected As Susil Raj (The Name of the Petitioner typed as “Sunil Raj” in the cause title of the Memorandum of Crl.M.C., Synopsis, Index and petition for Interim Direction and on The Docket is corrected as “Susil Raj” as per order dated 12.11.2019 in CRL.M.A.No.1/2019 in CRL.M.C.No.1797/2017.) Versus Gopan & Another High Court of Kerala
25-06-2020 Sunil @ Sunil Ashok Gadivaddar Versus State of Karnataka, Rep. by SPP, Bengaluru High Court of Karnataka
04-06-2020 Sunil Versus State of U.P. High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
20-05-2020 Sunil Kumar Aledia Versus Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Others High Court of Delhi
30-03-2020 Sunil Kumar Mohanty Versus Kalahandi Anchalika Gramya Bank & Others High Court of Orissa
13-03-2020 M/s. Fossil India Private Limited, Represented by Sunil Prabhakaran Authorised Signatory Versus The Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Tax (Audit-5.4), Bengaluru & Others High Court of Karnataka
12-03-2020 Sunil Kumar Mishra Versus State High Court of Delhi
17-02-2020 Sunil Gandhi & Another V/S A.N. Buildwell Private Limited High Court of Delhi
13-02-2020 Rambabu Singh Thakur Versus Sunil Arora & Others Supreme Court of India
13-02-2020 M/s. Vadim Infrastructure Private Limited. (formerly M/s.VolTech Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Represented by its Director R. Rajamanickam Versus M/s. Sunil HiTech Engineers Ltd., Rep. by its Chairman & Managing Director & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
06-02-2020 Sunil Kumar @ Sunil Versus State of Kerala Reptd. by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam High Court of Kerala
06-02-2020 Sunil Soni & Another Versus State of U.P. & Another High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
04-02-2020 Sunil Kumar, Director, Zephyr Entrance Coaching Centre, Kunnumpuram Versus C.S. Abdul Jabbar Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Thiruvananthapuram
30-01-2020 Sunil Polist Versus CPIO /Manager (CRM)/EDMS Life Insurance Corporation of India Central Information Commission
21-01-2020 Sunil @ Sumit Versus State of Maharashtra In the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur
20-01-2020 R.C. Sood & Co. Developers Pvt. Ltd. Versus Sunil Bansal & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
19-12-2019 B. Sunil Baliga Versus Sudir High Court of Karnataka
17-12-2019 Shweta @ Sakshi Versus Sunil High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench At Dharwad
12-12-2019 S. Sudarshan Versus G.M. Sunil Kumar High Court of Karnataka
11-12-2019 Sunil Bharti Mittal & Others Versus N. Naresh Kumar & Another High Court of Karnataka
11-12-2019 Sunil Pundalik Admile Versus Madhukar Tukaram Kshirsagar In the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad
06-12-2019 Dharmendra Prasad & Others Versus Sunil Kumar & Others Supreme Court of India
27-11-2019 Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement Versus Sunil Godhwani High Court of Delhi
21-11-2019 Sunil Versus Neethu High Court of Kerala
14-11-2019 Soma Barman Nee Datta Versus Sunil Chandra Podder & Others West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
04-11-2019 Sunil Bhai Sheth Versus M/s. Agricore Commodities Pvt. Ltd. & Others Supreme Court of India
15-10-2019 Miraj Medical Centre Miraj through Medical Superintendent & Others Versus Sunil Tukaram Danane & Another High Court of Judicature at Bombay
27-09-2019 P.S. Abhiram Sunil Versus Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Science, Represented By Its Registrar, Bengaluru & Another High Court of Karnataka
20-09-2019 Sharmila Mukhopadhyay Versus Sunil Kanti Barua, Rep by his Constituted Attorney - Prasanta Bose & Others West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
20-09-2019 Sunil Versus State of Maharashtra & Another In the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur
16-09-2019 Sunil Eknath Bajaj & Others Versus Maheshwari Seva Trust & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad
11-09-2019 Sunil Kumar Agarwal Versus State of U.P. & Another High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
03-09-2019 M/s. Balaji Ginning Factory, through Its Proprietor – Sunil Chiranjilal Bajaj Versus Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner In the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur
22-08-2019 M/s. Haskoning B.V. Dutch Consulting Engineers & Architects rep. by its Power of Attorney holder Sunil Kumar Versus M/s. Kamarajar Port Ltd. High Court of Judicature at Madras
22-08-2019 Pawan Kumar Versus Sunil Kumar High Court of Punjab and Haryana
01-08-2019 Rohan Sunil Jain (Chavre) & Others Versus The State of Maharashtra, Through : the Police Sub-Inspector & Another In the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad
17-07-2019 Sunil Muneshwar Yadav & Another Versus State of Maharashtra & Another In the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur
17-07-2019 Ramanna Versus K.S. Sunil Gupta & Others High Court of Karnataka
16-07-2019 Lakhi Debi Jaiswal Versus Sunil Kumar Shaw West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
09-07-2019 Sunil Barve Versus State of M.P. & Others High Court of Madhya Pradesh Bench at Indore
08-07-2019 Sunil Bhai Sheth Versus M/s. Agricore Commodities Pvt. Ltd. & Another High Court of Judicature at Bombay
04-07-2019 Sunil Appayya Matapathi Versus State of Karnataka High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench At Dharwad
03-07-2019 Rajeshwari Versus Sunil & Others High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench At Dharwad
02-07-2019 Sunil Vasudeva & Others Versus Sundar Gupta & Others Supreme Court of India
02-07-2019 Sunil Versus The State of Maharashtra In the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur
28-06-2019 Sunil Kumar Patel Versus State of Chhattisgarh & Others High Court of Chhattisgarh
25-06-2019 Sunil Kumar Santwani Versus State of Chhattisgarh High Court of Chhattisgarh
24-06-2019 For the Petitioner: Sarvesh Kumar Singh, A.A.G., Sunil Kumar Verma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Ravi Kumar, A.C. to A.A.G, Raghwanand, GA. High Court of Judicature at Patna
14-06-2019 State Bank of India, West Bengal Versus Sunil Kumar Maity & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
03-06-2019 Sunil Ratnaparkhi & Another Versus Official Liquidator of M/a Satwik Electric Controls Pvt Ltd. High Court of Judicature at Bombay
29-05-2019 Sunil Bansal Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax High Court of Rajasthan Jaipur Bench
15-05-2019 Jyoti Taide Versus Sunil Dambare & Another High Court of Chhattisgarh
10-05-2019 PT Purnanand Tiwari Intermediate College & Others Versus Sunil Kumar Agrawal & Others High Court of Uttarakhand
09-05-2019 Rachana Madan & Another Versus Sunil Madan High Court of Delhi
07-05-2019 Sunil Kumar Versus Presiding Officer Labour Court & Another High Court of Delhi
03-05-2019 Ratnem Vishnu Kamat @ Rukmabai Vishnu Kamat & Another Versus Roopali Sunil Lotlikar & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Goa
25-04-2019 Rathnayake Mudiyanselage Sunil Ratnayake Versus Hon. Attorney General, Attorney General's Department, Colombo 12 Supreme Court of Sri Lanka
25-04-2019 Rathnayake Mudiyanselage Sunil Ratnayake Versus Hon. Attorney General, Attorney General's Department, Colombo Supreme Court of Sri Lanka
25-04-2019 Rathnayake Mudiyanselage Sunil Ratnayake Versus Hon. Attorney General, Attorney General's Department, Colombo 12 Supreme Court of Sri Lanka
22-04-2019 Sunil Kumar Saxena Versus Export Inspection Council & Others High Court of Delhi
11-04-2019 Sunil @ Papu Versus The State of Karnataka, Represented by its Secretary, Home Department & Others High Court of Karnataka
10-04-2019 Sunil & Others Versus State of Maharashtra In the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad
09-04-2019 Sunil Yadav Versus State of U.P. High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
01-04-2019 The Employees Provident Fund Organisation & Another Versus B. Sunil Kumar & Others Supreme Court of India
29-03-2019 Sunil Kumar Biswas Versus Ordinance Factory Board & Others Supreme Court of India
28-03-2019 United India Insurance Co. Ltd. through its Divisional Manager and authorised representative and Signatory, Jalgaon Divisional Office Versus Sunil & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad
26-03-2019 Dr. Sankar Kumar Mondal Versus Sunil Kumar Roy West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
20-03-2019 Commissioner of Income Tax Delhi Versus Sunil Lamba High Court of Delhi
12-03-2019 Sunil John Mathew Versus K.L. Lency & Others High Court of Kerala
11-03-2019 Sunil Versus State By CPI, Banahatti High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench At Dharwad
08-03-2019 MES No.243672 Shri Kh Sunil Singh Fitter, General Mechanic (High Skilled) & Others Versus The Union of India, Represented by the Secretary to the Government of India & Another Central Administrative Tribunal Guwahati Bench Guwahati
07-03-2019 Sunil Versus The State of Maharashtra In the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur
06-03-2019 K. Sunil Kumar Versus D. Prasobha Devi & Another High Court of Kerala
27-02-2019 Sunil Kumar Gupta & Others Versus State of Uttar Pradesh & Others Supreme Court of India
16-02-2019 Sunil Kumar Bande Versus Secretary to Government Education Department (Primary & Secondary Education) & Another High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench OF Kalaburagi
11-02-2019 Sunil Kumar Versus Sambhu Singh High Court of Rajasthan
01-02-2019 Sunil Versus State High Court of Delhi
30-01-2019 Lataben Versus Sunil Bhikhabhai Patel High Court of Gujarat At Ahmedabad
25-01-2019 M.R. Sunil Raj & Another Versus Kristal Infrastructure Ltd., represented by its Director K.K. Namboothiri & Others Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Thiruvananthapuram
23-01-2019 Sunil Sudhakar Fegde & Another Versus Kishor Devram Rane & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
23-01-2019 Sunil Grover Versus Government of NCT of Delhi & Others High Court of Delhi
22-01-2019 Vandana Mimani Versus Sunil Jhawar High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
11-01-2019 Sunil Kumar & Another Versus State of J.K. & Others High Court of Jammu and Kashmir
11-01-2019 Archita @ Anu Seth Versus Sunil Seth High Court of Delhi
11-01-2019 Archita @ Anu Seth Versus Sunil Seth High Court of Delhi
10-01-2019 Sunil Gupta Versus Roots Corporation Limited High Court of Delhi
10-01-2019 Pralhad Ganpat Salgar Versus Sunil Dilip Kakod High Court of Judicature at Bombay
10-01-2019 Sunil Kumar Jain Versus Anju Choudhry & Others High Court of Chhattisgarh