|Rediff India Abroad Home | All the sections|
Painting case: HC summons Tehelka editor
November 04, 2007 15:38 IST
The Delhi High Court has summoned Tehelka editor-in-chief Tarun Tejpal and his sister Neena Tejpal in a case filed by well-known painter Raghu Vyas seeking damages of Rs 1 crore for allegedly infringing his copyright of one of his paintings.
Justice S N Agrawal also restrained the duo from selling and reproducing the painting titled 'The Realm of Bliss'. The court also summoned Tehelka, a media house, Bonhams, an auction house and Aman Nath, an expert in the field of
"The defendants and their agents are restrained from infringing the copyright of the plaintiff (Raghu Vyas) in the painting entitled 'The Realm of Bliss'," the court said while passing the interim order after hearing the contention of Vyas.
The painter, in his suit, contended that he signed an agreement with Tehelka for participating in an auction titled 'Art of Freedom' at London [Images] organised by Bonhams, an auction house of the UK, in association with Tehelka and Aman Nath on July 11.
"After the agreement, Vyas in collaboration with Bollywood actor Manisha Koirala [Images] painted a piece titled 'Realm of Bliss' for the said auction which was handed over to Tehelka in April 2007," the suit said.
Vyas submitted that just nine days before the auction he came to know about de-listing of his painting from the event through newspaper report.
"I tried on numerous occasions to get in touch with Tejpal, but was unsuccessful. When I met Tejpal in London I did not get any response from him. And on the day of auction, my painting was not showcased," he said.
Delisting of his work caused great embarrassment and humiliation in front of people who came from across the world, the painter said, adding he had to go through mental trauma after the incident.
Contending that he owns the exclusive intellectual property rights in the painting, Vyas also submitted before the court that the painting has still not been returned to him and he fears that it might be copied by the defendants (Tehelka and others).