VIVEKANANDA INSTITUTE OF PROFESSIONAL

STUDIES, (VSLLS),
GGSIPU, NEW DELHI

CASE ANALYSIS ON

NAJMA HEPTULLA V. ORIENT

LONGMAN AND ORS.

(IPR P.S.D.A.)

SUBMITTED TO: SUBMITTED BY:

DR. VARSHA DOGRA, SHIVASTUTI
ASST. PROFESSOR, VSLLS 13017703520
VIII “M”
BBA LL.B.

1
FACTS OF THE CASE:
The manuscript of the book ‘India Wins Freedom’ was ready for publication in November, 1957.
However, before the book could be published, Maulana Azad, the author of the book, died. After
that, National Archives, New Delhi and National Library, Calcutta agreed to be the trustees of
the complete manuscript, including the 30 pages which were not published till the present
judgement. It was agreed that seal of the complete manuscript would only be broken after 22nd
February, 1988, on the request of Prof. Humayun Kabir, a close associate of Maulana Azad. On
29th May, 1958 Fatima Begum (grandmother of the Plaintiff) and Nooruddin Ahmed, two legal
heirs of Maulana Azad, gave their written consent to the arrangements for the publication of the
aforesaid book, excluding the 30 pages.

On 2nd September, 1958 an agreement was entered into between Prof. Kabir and Orient
Longman to publish the aforesaid book, excluding the 30 pages, and pay half of the royalty to
Indian Council of Cultural Relations and the other half to Fatima Begum and Nooruddin Ahmed
equally. It was stated in the agreement that Prof. Kabir was the composer of the book. It was also
agreed that the publishers would have the first option to publish the complete book after the seals
would be broken on 22nd February, 1988.

A notice dated 13th February, 1988 was issued by the Plaintiff to the National Library and
National Archives to inform that she was not desirous to publish the complete book. Later on, the
present suit was filed for the rendition of accounts and injunction against the Defendants to
restrain them from publishing the complete book.

The Plaintiff (Najma Heptulla), one of the legal heirs of late Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, had
sought relief against Defendant No. 1 (M/s. Orient Longman Ltd.) with whom an agreement had
been entered into by Professor Humayun Kabir, who is claimed by his daughter (Defendant no.
6), to be the real author of the book ‘India Wins Freedom’. Maulana Azad, during his life time,
wrote the aforesaid book India Wins Freedom.

2
 CONTENTIONS OF THE PLAINTIFF:
Maulana Azad, during his life time, wrote the aforesaid book India Wins Freedom.
Plaintiff is a legal representative of Maulana Azad and the copyright in the complete book vests
in the legal representatives. It is, therefore, submitted that Prof. Kabir had no authority to enter
into the agreement dated 2nd September, 1958 with Orient Longman. Until all the legal
representatives of Maulana Azad decide to publish the entire book, the same cannot be made
known to the public.

CONTENTIONS OF THE DEFENDANTS:

Agreement dated 2nd September, 1958 was valid because Prof. Humayun Kabir
was a joint author with Maulana Azad and that he had been duly authorised by the
owners of the copyright to execute the agreement dated 2nd September, 1958.

ISSUES:
1) Whether Maulana Azad was the sole author of ‘India Wins Freedom’?
2) Whether Professor Kabir had the authority to enter into an agreement with Oriental Longman
Ltd. regarding the said book?

LEGAL PROVISIONS INVOLVED:

Section 2(d), Section 55(2), and Section 18 of the Copyright Act, 1957.

COURT’S OBESERVATIONS:

1) No
Rationale of Decision: According to the preface to the said book written by Prof Kabir, Maulana
Azad used to describe his experiences in Urdu, on the basis of which a draft in English would be
prepared by Prof. Kabir. The intention of the Copyright Act cannot be to give the status of an
author only to the person in whose language the literary piece is written while completely
ignoring the person who contributed the entire material. Both the subject matter and the language
are important. Hence, Maulana Azad and Prof. Kabir are joint authors.

3
 2) Yes
Rationale of Decision: As Prof. Kabir was not the sole author of the said book, it was necessary
for him to have been authorised by the legal representatives of Maulana Azad to enter into an
agreement with Orient Longman. Even though from the document dated 29th May, 1958 alone it
is not possible to conclude that all the terms contained in the agreement dated 2nd September,
1958 were expressly ratified by the legal heirs, their conduct of accepting the royalty, payable by
Orient Longman, must have led it to believe that the said agreement had their consent. Having
enjoyed the fruits of the said agreement for all these years without any demur, the legal
representatives of Maulana Azad are estopped from challenging the validity of the said
agreement.
Hence, the Defendants were allowed to break the seals of the covers of the complete book ‘India
Wins Freedom’ and make its contents known to the public.

ANALYSIS:
i. The Court has relied on the judgment of Donoghue v. Allied Newspapers Ltd. and Walter v.
Lane and given the distinction between the speaker and reporter and who will get the
copyright. The court is of the view that a speaker, expresses his thoughts and therefore that is
an idea. But, the reporter, makes the notes, arranges it and expresses it in the way, he
perceives it to be and thus, the work is not mere a mechanical work. It involves skill and thus,
the reporter is entitled to copyright. Hence, the term “author” as discussed by the Court, also
involves the work of translation, skilfully arranging the ideas of someone. The court has
focussed on the characteristics that work be included in author.
ii. The other thing discussed by the court is regarding the rights of a joint author. The court has
discussed regarding the dead author’s consent regarding the assignment of copyright, would
be of the legal heirs or the legal representative.
iii. The court has also elaborated on the Principle of Promissory and Equitable Estoppel, where
one party has changed his position in relation to another, then the other person cannot
eventually alter his position. Also, once, the benefit is enjoyed by the person, then he cannot
deny the agreement thereafter. Thus, the definition of author and who would be author and
joint author and assignment rights of copyright of the author has been discussed.