AL HAMD TRADENATION vs PHONOGRAPHIC PERFORMANCE LIMITED

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI C.O.(COMM.IPD-CR) 8/2024, I.A. 33181/2024 & I.A. 33182/2024 AL HAMD TRADENATION .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Aditya Ganju, Ms. Pallavi Shali, Ms. Sambhavi Mishra and Mr. Samanyu Sethi, Advs. M: 9560047212 versus PHONOGRAPHIC PERFORMANCE LIMITED .....Respondent Through: Mr. Chander M. Lall, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Ankur Sangal, Ms. Sucheta Roya, Mr. Raghu Vinayak Sinha, Mr. Shaurya Pandey and Ms. Ananya Mehan, Advs. M: 7761895769 CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA JUDGMENT % 13.05.2025 MINI PUSHKARNA, J: 1. The present petition has been filed under Section 31 of the Copyright Act, 1957 (“Copyright Act”), read with Rule 6 of the Copyright Rules, 2013 (“Copyright Rules”), seeking grant of compulsory license and ascertainment of license rates, thereof. As per the petitioner, the respondent has sought to charge unreasonable and prohibitory licence fees towards its repertoire of sound recordings, which effectively entails refusal to publish/re-publish and/or allow performance of its works in public, on account of which, the 2. The brief facts of the case are as follows: 2.1 The petitioner, in the regular course of its business, was organising