Case Details

Citation(s)
1997 SLG 1231 1997 SLD 1231 = 1997 PLD 57
Sindh High Court
Suit No. 14 of 1996, decided on 22nd August, 1996.
Presented By: Before Rasheed Ahmed Razvi, J
Arshad Tayebally alongwith M. Shahid for Plaintiff. Ghulam Abbas Pishori for Defendant No. 1. Munawwar Ghani for Defendant No.2.

MS. ATIQA ODHO---Plaintiff

VERSUS

R.LINTAS (PVT.) LTD. and another--_Defendants

Law: Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)

Section: 54

Law: Contract Act (IX of 1872)

Section: 73

Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----S. 54---"Property" as used in S.54, Specific Relief Act, 1877-- Connotation---Term "property" used in S.54, Specific Relief Act, 1877 was not limited to movable or immovable properties but would include several kinds of creation including intellectual property---Contract between plaintiff, a model, and defendants whereby defendants were entitled to use plaintiff's photographs for advertising product "Lux" in all forms of advertisement---Term 'property' used in terms of agreement would refer to all advertising materials produced and created by defendants---Agreement in question, however, did not suggest that defendants would be entitled to use photographs or `l . V. images of plaintiff for indefinite period---Perpetual injunction, could, thus be granted even in matters of violation of contract, breach of trust, infringement of copyright, patent, trade mark, easement, nuisance - -Penn "property" therefore, should not be restricted so as to frustrate spirit of S.54, Specific Relief Act, 1877. Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----(. 54---Perpetual injunction---Injurious falsehood and false statement-- Injurious falsehood entitling grant of prohibitory injunction ---Essentials-- Plaintiff must prove presence of false statement about plaintiff or his property; such statement must be calculated to cause damage to plaintiff; such .statement in question, must have been made in public or within hearing of third party; such statement was made maliciously by defendant; and plaintiff must have suffered damage on account of statement made by defendant. Contract Act (IX of 1872)--- ----S. 73---Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), S.54---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.XXXIX, Rr.l & 2---Benefit arising out of contract ---Interpretation-- Entitlement to grant of interim injunction---Contract involving livelihood of any of the party must be read with caution and care---Any benefit arising out of such contract must be interpreted in favour of that party whose livelihood was based on such contract--- Exclusive right to use plaintiff's photograph and T.V. images for advertising…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register