Restraining order on “Sujatha” further extended

The Commercial High Court further extended the Enjoining Order restraining the telecasting, exhibiting, displaying or showing the film ‘Sujatha,’ produced by K. Gunaratnam of Ceylon Theatres Ltd. till February 27.

Yesterday, when the case was called, the defendants were requested to file objections. However the defendants moved for a further date and were granted time till February 27 to file objections.

High Court Judge M. Ashan R. Marikar had earlier issued the injunction order on the defendants, popular film conserver Tissa Nagodawithana and Movie Producers and Importers Ltd. prohibiting them from screening or telecasting “Sujatha”.

The Judge had issued this injunction on the defendants pursuant to an Intellectual Property litigation filed by G.R. Pathmaraj, the administrator of Mr. Gunaratnam’s property.

Counsel S.A. Parathalingam PC appearing with Niluka Udumulla instructed by Anoma Gunatilake for the Plaintiff, had submitted that the producer of the film K.gunartnam or the lawful administrator of Late Mr. Gunaratnam’s estate had not transferred the copyright to the defendants nor to any other party.

He said no person had the copyright to the film which remained the property of Mr. Gunaratnam until 2016. The Counsel said neither Mr.gunaratnam’s wife nor his daughter had the right to

High Court Judge M. Ashan R. Marikar had earlier issued the injunction order on the defendants, popular film conserver Tissa Nagodawithana and Movie Producers and Importers Ltd. prohibiting them from screening or telecasting “Sujatha”

transfer the copyright of the film “Sujatha.”

The Counsel contended that the defendants had acted illegally causing grave and irreparable damage and loss to the Plaintiff.

Counsel Dhanya Gunawardena, appearing for the 1st and 2nd defendants, said that the defendants position was that the economic rights of the film belongs to the company where the 1st defendant is a Director and said that the film never formed a part of the testamentary proceedings filed before the District Court.

He said the owner of the film K. Gunaratnam had duly transferred the rights especially the economic rights of the film to the company where the 1st defendant is himself in the director. Counsel underscored the fact that the plaintiff had misrepresented facts by stating that the film remains a part of the estate of the late Mr. Gunaratnam.