Copyright Claim Over Songs In Restaurants: Supreme Court Stays Delhi HC Direction In Phonographic Performance Ltd's Plea
The Supreme Court has stayed Delhi High Court's direction to Azure Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. to pay Phonographic Performance Ltd. (PPL) as per the tariff of Recorded Music Performance Ltd. (RMPL), as if PPL were a member of RMPL, for playing songs from PPL's catalogue.A bench of Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan issued notice in PPL's special leave petition challenging the judgment of...
The Supreme Court has stayed Delhi High Court's direction to Azure Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. to pay Phonographic Performance Ltd. (PPL) as per the tariff of Recorded Music Performance Ltd. (RMPL), as if PPL were a member of RMPL, for playing songs from PPL's catalogue.
A bench of Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan issued notice in PPL's special leave petition challenging the judgment of the division bench of the High Court that modified a temporary injunction granted by a single judge restraining Azure from using PPL's copyrighted songs.
The Court, however, clarified that its stay on the division bench's direction would not result in restoration of the injunction passed by the single judge against Azure.
“Issue notice. The impugned direction in terms of paragraph 27 will remain stayed. We however clarify that as a result of stay, the order dated 3rd March 2025 passed by single judge will not operate.”
The Court did not stay the entire judgment which held that PPL cannot be permitted to issue or grant licences for the sound recordings in its repertoire without registering itself as a copyright society or becoming a member of any registered copyright society.
PPL filed a copyright infringement suit against Azure Hospitality, which runs about 86 restaurants across India, including brands like 'Mamagoto', 'Dhaba', and 'Sly Granny'. PPL alleged that its representatives found the restaurants playing copyrighted sound recordings without obtaining a licence.
On March 3, 2025, a single judge of the Delhi High Court passed an interim injunction restraining Azure from using PPL's copyrighted works in its outlets. The Court observed that PPL had established a prima facie case of infringement based on assignment deeds and noted that Azure had not denied playing the recordings.
When Azure challenged the injunction, the division bench held that PPL, not being a registered copyright society, could not issue licences unless it became a member of a registered society. It observed that under Section 18(1) of the Copyright Act, PPL could not act as a licensing authority unless it was registered as a copyright society or was a member of one.
However, in order to balance equities, instead of outrightly setting aside the temporary injunction on Azure, the division bench modified the order and directed Azure to make payments to PPL as per the RMPL tariff in case it wished to play PPL's recordings. This arrangement, the Court said, would be subject to the final outcome of PPL's suit against Azure. PPL filed the present SLP against this order.
During the hearing today, Justice Oka questioned the High Court's direction for Azure to make payments to PPL as per RMPL's tariff, saying, “How such order can be passed? It was not prayed for also. Such order cannot be passed.” He noted that the order of the division bench modified the single judge's injunction, and unless the Supreme Court finally decides the appeal, the injunction cannot be restored.
Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for PPL, submitted that the entire order of the division bench ought to be stayed, instead of just the direction to make payments as per RMPL's tariff.
However, Justice Oka refused to stay the judgment itself, stating, “That we will not stay. How can we stay the judgement? Today we are not deciding it finally.”
The Court issued notice returnable on July 21, 2025
Case no. – SLP(C) No. 10977/2025
Case Title – Phonographic Performance Ltd. v. Azure Hospitality Private Limited