ITV

Category: High Court

  • Delhi HC orders X user to pay Rs 5 lakh to TV Today over defamatory posts

    Delhi HC orders X user to pay Rs 5 lakh to TV Today over defamatory posts

    MUMBAI: The Delhi High Court has directed X user Anurag Srivastava to pay Rs 5 lakh in damages to TV Today for defamatory posts on X targeting the channel and its journalist Rajdeep Sardesai. The posts were made in reaction to an interview with actor Rhea Chakraborty that aired in 2020.

    Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav held that the posts were “highly defamatory” and had not been backed by evidence, despite the defendant being given enough opportunity to do so.

    “The Court finds that the objectionable tweets were highly defamatory and remain unsubstantiated by the defendant, despite having been afforded sufficient opportunity to do so. Such an irresponsible act of the defendant has to be deprecated.

    “Having considered the overall circumstances, this Court deems it just and proper to award Rs 5,00,000 as general compensatory damages to the plaintiff, to redress the reputational harm, emotional hardship, and loss of professional credibility caused by the conduct of the defendant,” the order read.

    The case was filed in 2020 by TV Today against Srivastava, who operated the handles @theanuragkts and @theanuragoffice on X (formerly Twitter).

    Soon after the interview went live, Srivastava posted derogatory comments about Sardesai, including calling him a “dalla,” (a derogatory Hindi term implying ‘pimp’), and comparing him to controversial preacher Zakir Naik. He also alleged that Chakraborty had bribed both Sardesai and the channel to secure the interview.

    TV Today told the court that these remarks were part of a “systematic attack” on the anchor and the network’s reputation. It added that the damage extended to its business as well, pointing out that annual income fell from Rs 899.57 crore in 2019–20 to Rs 819.92 crore in 2020–21.

    Srivastava later deleted the posts and assured the court that he would not repost them. Interim orders had already restrained him from uploading similar content.

    The High Court has now directed him to pay Rs 5 lakh to TV Today as compensation for reputational harm and loss of credibility.

  • Delhi High Court Orders Patanjali to Pause Negative Ads Targeting Dabur

    Delhi High Court Orders Patanjali to Pause Negative Ads Targeting Dabur

    MUMBAI: The rivalry between India’s leading Ayurvedic brands entered the legal arena this week, as the Delhi High Court ordered Patanjali Ayurved to halt all advertisements disparaging Dabur’s chyawanprash. The directive reflects the judiciary’s increasing scrutiny of advertising claims in the high-stakes wellness sector.

    The dispute began after Dabur, one of India’s oldest and most established names in Ayurvedic health, alleged that Patanjali’s recent campaigns not only targeted its flagship product, but also implied
    that competitors use inferior or artificial ingredients—claims Dabur described as misleading and potentially damaging to consumer trust.

    In its preliminary order, the court noted that while comparative advertising is allowed, it cannot cross into unfair or baseless disparagement. The judges observed that advertising should inform, not
    mislead, and must avoid statements that unjustly tarnish the reputation of rival products.

    The interim order requires Patanjali to suspend all negative advertisements against Dabur chyawanprash until further notice. The case will proceed for detailed examination of the ad content and
    industry standards.

    The legal intervention underscores the fierce marketing competition in India’s booming Ayurvedic and natural health market, where trust and authenticity are prized by both brands and consumers. Industry experts say the ruling sends a clear signal to marketers: fair play remains essential in the fight for health-conscious buyers.

    The matter is scheduled for further hearing in the coming weeks, when the court will assess the factual basis of Patanjali’s claims and address the broader issue of responsible advertising in the wellness
    sector. For now, both companies—and the wider industry—are watching closely, aware that the outcome could set the tone for brand battles in India’s fast-growing consumer market.

    (If you are an Anime fan and love Anime like Demon Slayer, Spy X Family, Hunter X Hunter, Tokyo Revengers, Dan Da Dan and Slime, Buy your favourite Anime merchandise on AnimeOriginals.com.)
     

  • Delhi High Court blocks rogue sites from streaming India–England series

    Delhi High Court blocks rogue sites from streaming India–England series

    MUMBAI: In a significant win for content rights holders, the Delhi high court has restrained multiple rogue websites from illegally streaming the India tour of England 2025 (ITE 2025), following a copyright infringement plea filed by JioStar India Pvt Ltd (formerly Star India Pvt Ltd).

    Justice Saurabh Banerjee granted a ‘dynamic+’ injunction, enabling real-time blocking of infringing websites during live match broadcasts.

    The five-Test series between India and England is scheduled from June to August 2025 and JioStar holds exclusive digital media rights for ITE 2025 under a licensing agreement with Culver Max Entertainment Pvt Ltd (Sony).

    JioStar alleged various third party websites of streaming IPL 2025 illegally and were likely to do so again during the England tour.

    As per the court’s orders:

    . Immediate suspension of the four listed rogue domains by their respective registrars, including Namecheap Inc., Sav.com LLC, and Tucows Domains Inc.

    .  Direction to internet service providers — including Airtel, Jio, and Vodafone Idea — to block access to these websites within 72 hours.

    .  Permission for JioStar to notify additional infringing websites on affidavit during the series, without the need for separate court orders.

    .  Coordination mandated between the Department of Telecommunications (DoT) and the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) to ensure ISP compliance.

    .  Inclusion of unnamed infringers as John Doe defendants to allow future enforcement.

    This comes after the court addressed the growing challenge posed by “hydra-headed” piracy websites, which routinely mask ownership and replicate via mirror domains.

    “The rights of an intellectual property holder cannot be rendered otiose in this world of rapidly developing technology,” the order observed.

    The judgement referenced recent rulings such as Universal City Studios v. Dotmovies.baby and Applause Entertainment v. Meta Platforms, reflecting evolving judicial strategies to curb digital piracy. The matter is scheduled for the next hearing on 13 October 2025. In the interim, JioStar has been directed to file regular affidavits identifying any new infringing domains during the India–England series.

  • Unisys Infosolutions gets favorable Delhi high court injunction order against pirating websites

    Unisys Infosolutions gets favorable Delhi high court injunction order against pirating websites

    the domains.

    MUMBAI: Pirating websites in India beware. December has brought some bad news for you. Earlier this month, the Delhi High granted a permanent injunction order against 71 web sites which were pirating media tech firm Unisys Infosolutions content online.

    Unisys owns the copyright to a catalogue of 60 plus regional films which it exploits on YouTube under the channel  Saga Hits, on its own OTT  platform Kableone and other third-party platforms. The films have either been produced by it or in collaboration with other producers or acquired and include titles like Zindagi Zindabaad, Cheta Singh, Snowman, Kulche Chole, Television, Posti, Maa, Warning, Ikko Mikke, Happy Go Lucky, Manje Bistr, The Black Prince and Zindagi Kitni Haseen Hay.

    Sites such as desicinemas.tv, desicinemas.pk, tellygossips.tv, movies23.pk,  among many others were illegally show casing Unisys’ catalogue  of films and making money either off advertising online or through subscription fees. Hence, it filed a suit against them, including Google, ISPs, the department of telecommunications (DoT) and  ministry of electronics and information technology (Meity) as defendants.

    The Delhi high court, after listening to Unisys’ lawyers arguments, passed an injunction against the sites from showing the films and because the owners of the sites are not locate-able, it ordered Google to stop indexing them on its search engine. Additionally, it ordered the registrars and internet service providers to block the rogue domain names and make them inaccessible from Indian shores.  Finally, it ordered DoT and Meity to ensure that its orders for blockage are followed to the T by issuing a government notification in this regard.

    The court also issued a Joh Doe order under which any other future infringing or rogue sites would be treated similarly. Additionally, the court ordered Unisys to continue to inform the court about the progress of the blockage of the  current rogue web sites. mentioned in the petition

    The counsel for Google who was present in the court accepted the government’s notice and order and agreed to go ahead  with the government’s directions.

    However, a media  observer stated that while the order is a landmark one, Unisys will have to be on the alert as the rogue websites will easily move the content to another domain or URL.

    “The battle to overcome piracy is not over until those behind the piracy are put behind bars and the servers taken down,” she said. “This requires multinational coordination between legal authorities in neighbouring countries like Pakistan. Some of this is already happening in Europe where coalitions against piracy in various countries  are working together with the police  to book online pirates, apart from taking blockage measures.”

    Is anyone out there listening?

  • Zeel’s audit firm Deloitte Haskins fined Rs 2 crore for gross negligence

    Zeel’s audit firm Deloitte Haskins fined Rs 2 crore for gross negligence

    MUMBAI: Audit firm Deliotte Haskins & Sells  (DHS) has got a rap on its  knuckles from the audit and accounting watchdog , the  National Financial Reporting Authority (NFRA). It said that the former failed to meet relevant requirements of the standards of audit (SAs) and violated the Companies Act in respect of certain significant related party transactions concerning Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd  (Zeel) and promoter companies of Essel group chairman Subhash Chandra. 

    DHS, Zeel’s auditor then, did not disclose these doubtful  transactions  in Zeel’s financial statements. Hence NFRA has imposed a fine of Rs 2 crore on DHS and it also penalised two CAs employed by the audit firm Rs 10  lakh and five lakh each. It even banned them from practising as CAs for the next five years.

    The NFRA order says that in September 2018, the Zeel chairman  who is also the promoter of Essel group, issued a letter to Yes Bank, committing a Rs 200 crore fixed deposit of Zeel as a guarantee for the loans given by Yes Bank to a promoter group company Essel Green Mobility Ltd. 

    “The bank appropriated the fixed deposit (FD) in July 2019, towards settlement of loan amounts due from seven promoter group companies. Neither the creation and maintenance of FD nor its re appropriation by the Bank was with the approval of the board  or shareholders of the company. The statutory auditors failed to identify and report this misrepresentation.”

    “Our examination showed that the auditors were grossly negligent, failed to apply professional skepticism and due diligence, did not adequately challenge the management’s assertions, and failed to evaluate reporting of suspected fraud as required under Section 143(12) of the Act, which was evident from unauthorised guarantees/securities, premature closure of the FD by the Bank and unauthorised use of Zeel’s funds for settling the loan of  the promoter group companies, with the knowledge of the chairman of the group and management of Zeel.”
     

  • Sapphire Media wins BIG 92.7 FM; gets favourable order from NCLAT

    Sapphire Media wins BIG 92.7 FM; gets favourable order from NCLAT

    MUMBAI: It’s a big – actually Big 92.7 FM –  win for Haryana-outdoor firm and Indian Daily TV channel  owner Sapphire Media. It has got a favorable order from the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) for it to acquire the Reliance Broadcast Network run radio network Big FM 92.7.

    The principal bench of the NCLAT, Delhi on Monday dismissed the plea filed by Radio Mirchi, Orange FM and others against the NCLT judgement which approved the resolution plan of Sapphire Media for Big 92.7 FM.

    The NCLAT Bench comprising chairperson  justice Ashok Bhushan and (technical) member Barun Mitra in its order today said that “in view of the foregoing discussions and conclusions, we do not find any ground to interfere in the order of NCLT dated 06.05.2024 impugned in the above appeals. In result, all the appeals are dismissed.”

    Earlier, the NCLT bench comprising technical member Madhu Sinha and judicial member Reeta Kohli had approved the resolution plan submitted by Sapphire Media in its order dated 6 May  2024. As per the plan, Sapphire Media would  pay Rs 261 crore to secured and operational creditors against the total claims of Rs 947.5 crore.

    The resolution professional subsequently filed an application with NCLT Mumbai seeking approval of Sapphire Media’s resolution plan.

    Big FM 92.7 FM , owned by Reliance Broadcast Network, has been going through the insolvency process since February 2023.. It is the country’s largest radio network with 58 stations and a reach of over 1,200 towns and 50,000+ villages will reinforce Sapphire Media’s aggressive expansions plans in the media space.

    Sapphire Media is promoted by Aditya Vashistha and Kaithal-based businessman Sahil Mangla. Sapphire media runs a national Hindi news channel in name of India Daily and is one of the biggest outdoor advertising companies in India.

  • Finally, US court orders south Asian pirate Jadoo TV to shut down

    Finally, US court orders south Asian pirate Jadoo TV to shut down

    MUMBAI; While Jadoo is  a character we all recall very fondly from the Hrithik Roshan film Koi Mil gaya, the service called Jadoo has been one of the most hated in the world of pay TV. Especially by south Asian broadcasters and platforms in the US. 

    Jadoo TV was one of the most popular providers of pirated south Asian content to global audiences and it distributed its service through Jadoo set-top boxes and its mobile application  way back in the previous decade. Many had tried to have it shuttered, but most had failed. 

    However, yesterday, the International Broadcaster Coalition Against Piracy (IBCAP) announced  that a long-running lawsuit against Jadoo TV. and its US-based CEO, Sajid Sohail, has resulted in a final judgment of $24,969,911 and a permanent injunction against Jadoo TV and Sohail individually. Jadoo TV also agreed to permanently cease all operations worldwide by 22 December  2024.  
     
    Earlier in the case, the court granted summary judgment on all claims against Jadoo TV and Sohail, finding them liable for direct, contributory and vicarious copyright infringement. In that ruling, the court determined that. Sohail was personally liable as the guiding spirit behind the infringement of IBCAP member works.
    The court’s s announcement yesterday  follows years of protracted litigation dating back to November 2018, when IBCAP member Dish  Network initially filed the case. 

    The final judgment entered against Jadoo TV and  Sohail is unique in that it not only recognizes significant statutory damages for registered works ($14,550,000), but also a significant monetary award for unregistered works ($10,419,911). Notably, as part of a separate settlement agreement, Jadoo TV and  Sohail agreed to transfer all Jadoo TV customer lists to Dish, transfer all Jadoo TV trademarks and domain names to Dish , and pay Dish $1,500,000 by 25 February 2025.

    “This final judgment and settlement marks the culmination of a six-year legal battle against one of the most popular South Asian services offering pirated content, Jadoo TV, and its CEO, who was found personally liable for the damages caused by his and his company’s copyright infringement,” said IBCAP executive director  Chris Kuelling, “Today’s announcement sends a strong message that the end of the road for a pirate IPTV service is a significant monetary payment and loss of your entire business.”

    Dish had filed the case in in 2018 when Jadoo set-top boxes were widely available online and in retail stores throughout South Asian communities worldwide, including the US  and Canada.

    The case was coordinated by IBCAP and brought by IBCAP member Dish Network only after Dish and  IBCAP sent numerous notices of copyright infringement. 

    The lawsuit included claims for direct, contributory and vicarious infringement against Jadoo TV and  Sohail for airing certain IBCAP member content to which it did not have rights. Evidence for the case was obtained and provided by the IBCAP lab. Prosecution of the case and settlement negotiations were executed by Dish’s outside litigation counsel, Hagan Noll & Boyle, LLC.

  • Zee vs Railtel arbitration: tribunal dismisses claims by both

    Zee vs Railtel arbitration: tribunal dismisses claims by both

    MUMBAI: Railtel Corp and Zee Entertainment have been at loggerheads for the past three years.

    The bone of contention has been the cancellation of a 10 year contract that Zee’s subsidiary Margo Networks had signed with the former in March 2021 to provide content on demand (movies, news, music videos, and general entertainment) free of buffering onboard 8,731 trains including 5,723 suburban trains and more than 5,952 wi-fi-enabled railway stations. As part of this, media servers were to be installed in railway coaches.

    The Railway Board had assigned Railtel with the task of implementing this dream project which had then subcontracted it to Margo. Revenue expectations were high with the Railways hoping to pocket at least Rs 60 crore as part of the 50:50 arrangement it had made with Railtel.

    The project had moved to pilot implementation stage in a Rajdhani train and in an AC rake of the western railways.

    And then it was called off suddenly in November 2021. Railtel said, it was due to the alleged non-performance of Margo Networks. Zee Entertainment had disagreed and announced that it would haul Railtel to the courts.

    In August 2023, it started arbitration proceedings against Railtel for cancelling the contract and claimed amounts wrongfully forfeited by the latter along with costs/damages. The matter had been with the arbitral tribunal since then.

    Zee Entertainment, on 26 November 2025, informed  the BSE in a regulatory filing, that the arbitral tribunal had made its arbitral award. As part of that, it had rejected its and Margo’s claims against Railtel. It added that the tribunal had  also rejected the counter claims made by Railtel.

    Zee added that it is “evaluating the option of filing an application/appeal before the appropriate court for setting aside of the arbitral award.”

    Clearly, we have not seen the last of this courtroom saga. 

  • Delhi high court provides relief to Inox India in copyright registration appeal

    Delhi high court provides relief to Inox India in copyright registration appeal

    Mumbai: The Delhi high court provided relief to Inox India (INOX) by allowing an appeal challenging specific remarks included in the copyright registration certificate issued by the registrar of copyrights. Khaitan & Co represented Inox in this matter. The team included Smriti Yadav (partner), Nirupam Lodha (partner), Dhiren Karania (principal associate), Gautam Wadhwa (Senior Associate) and Vanshika Thapliyal (associate). Senior advocate Chander M. Lall appeared for Inox in this matter.

    The appeal addressed Inox’s contention that the registrar of copyrights had incorrectly imposed remarks on the certificate, including a statement that copyright in the work would cease if applied to an article more than 50 times. Inox argued that this restriction was inapplicable, as the artistic work in question, consisting of technical drawings, does not qualify for registration as a “design” under the Designs Act, 2000. Inox asserted that these remarks were unfounded and had been added without proper reasoning or rationale.

    During the proceedings before honorable justice Mini Pushkarna, the registrar of copyrights agreed to amend the registration certificate, committing to issue a corrected certificate without the contested remarks within four weeks. Additionally, the registrar’s counsel informed the court of ongoing updates to the website portal to prevent similar issues in the future.

    The court took note of these submissions and disposed of the appeal accordingly.

  • Delhi high court blocks 60 rogue sites for streaming Zee content

    Delhi high court blocks 60 rogue sites for streaming Zee content

    Mumbai: The Delhi high court granted interim relief to Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd, ordering the cessation of unauthorised streaming of its TV shows, movies, and other proprietary content on sixty rogue websites. Justice Mini Pushkarna directed domain registrars to suspend these sites and provide Zee with essential information, including contact details, IP addresses, and locations. Additionally, Internet Service Providers (ISPs) were instructed to block access to the infringing websites.

    Represented by advocate Sidharth Chopra, Zee noted extensive unauthorised streaming by defendants 1 through 60—rogue websites hosting popular shows such as Bastar – The Naxal Story, Kakuda, Rautu ka Raaz, and other original series without permission. These sites, operating anonymously, were reportedly profiting from unauthorised access to Zee’s intellectual property by featuring organised and regularly updated content. The suit names defendants 61 to 81 as domain registrars for suspension or blocking of the rogue websites, while defendant 82, Google LLC, is tasked with de-indexing these sites from search results. Defendants 83 to 91, representing Internet Service Providers, were added to restrict access to these websites. The Department of Telecommunications and the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, listed as defendants 92 and 93, respectively, were included to provide necessary notifications.

    He emphasised the impact on Zee Entertainment, noting that without intervention, ongoing piracy by defendants 1–60 could lead to irreparable harm given Zee’s investment in content production and distribution.

    The court further empowered Zee to report any additional websites found to be involved in unauthorised streaming during ongoing proceedings. In cases where a non-infringing site may be mistakenly blocked, the court assured that the site could seek rectification, provided it does not intend to breach Zee’s broadcast rights.

    Zee had initially sought a permanent injunction to prevent copyright violations and piracy by these sites, alleging that they profited from illegal streaming. Zee requested that the domain names be blocked or suspended, that registrars and ISPs disclose relevant information and that search engines like Google de-index these sites.

    After reviewing Zee’s arguments, the court found the media company had made a case for an injunction, concluding that Zee could suffer harm without this relief. Justice Pushkarna granted an ex parte interim injunction, and the case is set to continue on 7 March 2025.