Case Update – High Court of Orissa, ARBP No. 9 of 2024

Posted On - 24 January, 2025 • By - King Stubb & Kasiva

Summary:

In ARBP No. 9 of 2024, the High Court of Orissa addressed the appointment of an Arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The Petitioner, Shri Binaya Kumar Naik, sought arbitration for a dispute involving copyright issues. The Hon’ble Chief Justice Chakradhari Sharan Singh resolved the matter by appointing Dr. Justice Akshaya Kumar Rath, a former Judge of the High Court of Orissa, as the sole Arbitrator. The judgment clarified the arbitrability of copyright disputes, contributing to the evolving jurisprudence in intellectual property arbitration.

Issue Raised:

The core issue was whether disputes involving copyright infringement qualify as arbitrable under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, given the Supreme Court’s observations in Vidya Drolia and Others v. Durga Trading Corporation (2020).

Arguments Advanced

O.P. 1, relying on Vidya Drolia, contended that copyright infringement pertains to rights in rem, which are generally non-arbitrable. The Respondents argued that Arbitration would conflict with the legal principles distinguishing rights in rem from rights in personam.

Judgment:

The Court held that the submission advanced on behalf of Opposite Parties is wholly misconceived. The Court did not find at any place in the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Vidya Drolia where it has been held that dispute relating to infringement of copyright is non-arbitrable.

The Court with the consent of learned counsel for the parties appointed Dr. Justice Akshaya Kumar Rath, Former Judge of this Court, as the sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties.

Analysis:

This judgment reinforces the arbitration framework for intellectual property disputes in India. By distinguishing between rights in rem and rights in personam, the Court upheld Arbitration’s relevance in resolving copyright disputes.

This decision also demonstrates the judiciary’s openness to alternative dispute resolution methods, particularly in the intellectual property domain, aligning with India’s focus on streamlining commercial litigation and enhancing the ease of doing business.

Conclusion:

This judgement marks a significant step in arbitration jurisprudence. By affirming the arbitrability of copyright disputes, it strengthens arbitration as a viable and efficient mechanism for resolving intellectual property conflicts.