The Delhi High Court on Wednesday refused to vacate an interim injunction granted in favour of Saregama India Limited in its ongoing copyright dispute with music composer Ilaiyaraaja over the rights to songs and musical works from 134 films, as reported in Bar and Bench.
Justice Tushar Rao Gedela declined to set aside the ex-parte ad-interim injunction passed earlier this year, which restrains Ilaiyaraaja from exploiting, using, issuing licences for, or claiming ownership over works that Saregama asserts are protected by its copyright.
The interim order covers sound recordings as well as the literary and musical works forming part of 134 cinematograph films, including Annakkili, 16 Vayathiniley, Kavikkuyil, Bharathi, Pallavi Anu Pallavi, Mullum Malarum, Raaja Paarvai, Netrikkann and Kalyanaraman. A detailed copy of Wednesday’s order is yet to be made available.
The dispute arose after Saregama filed a suit against Ilaiyaraaja, alleging that the composer had been exploiting and licensing works over which the company claims copyright ownership.
On 13 February 2026, Justice Gedela had passed an ex-parte ad-interim injunction restraining Ilaiyaraaja from exploiting, using, licensing or claiming ownership over Saregama’s copyrighted works. The order prohibited the composer and anyone acting on his behalf from issuing licences for the disputed works or making ownership claims before third parties until further orders.
In its submissions before the High Court, Saregama stated that it was incorporated in 1901 as The Gramophone Company of India Limited and that between 1976 and 2001 it entered into assignment agreements with producers of several films. Under those agreements, the company claimed, the copyright in the sound recordings, musical works and literary works of songs vested with Saregama.
The company further submitted that it owns an extensive catalogue of film and non-film music across multiple languages, including Tamil, Hindi, Malayalam, Kannada and Telugu, and commercially licenses these works to third parties.
According to Saregama, it discovered alleged unauthorised use of its copyrighted works during the first week of February 2026 on streaming platforms such as Amazon Music, iTunes and JioSaavn. The company also alleged that Ilaiyaraaja had made ownership claims over the disputed content.
Saregama further relied upon a legal notice issued by Ilaiyaraaja on 13 January 2026, in which the composer claimed rights over musical works created, composed, arranged and orchestrated by him for various films, including works that form part of the present suit.
While granting interim relief on 13 February, the High Court observed that Saregama had established a “prima facie, strong case” in its favour. The Court further held that the “balance of convenience” lay in favour of Saregama and that the company was likely to suffer irreparable loss if interim protection was not granted.
Following the interim order, Ilaiyaraaja moved the High Court seeking to vacate the injunction. However, the Court on Wednesday rejected his plea, allowing the interim restraint to continue pending adjudication of the copyright suit.
In the proceedings, Saregama was represented by Senior Advocates Chander M. Lall and Akhil Sibal, along with Advocates Ankur Sangal, Ankit Arvind, Shashwat Rakshit, Sucheta Roy and Rishabh Rao of Khaitan & Co. Ilaiyaraaja was represented by Senior Advocate Swathi Sukumar, assisted by Advocates Naveen Nagarjuna, Shloka Narayanan, Ritk Raghuwanshi, Rishika Agarwal and Anshu Tulsyan.
Subscribe to our channels on WhatsApp, Telegram, Instagram and YouTube to get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.
