New Delhi, April 21, 2025 — The Supreme Court has temporarily stayed the Delhi High Court’s order directing Azure Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. to pay Phonographic Performance Ltd. (PPL) according to the tariff set by Recorded Music Performance Ltd. (RMPL), as if PPL were a member of RMPL, for the use of copyrighted songs from PPL’s catalogue.
A bench comprising Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan issued a notice in PPL’s special leave petition (SLP), challenging the judgment of the Delhi High Court’s division bench that had modified a temporary injunction earlier granted by a single judge. This injunction had restrained Azure Hospitality from using PPL’s copyrighted songs at its establishments.
“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 the single judge will not operate,” the Court clarified in its order.
Case Background
The dispute began when PPL, a music licensing company, filed a copyright infringement suit against Azure Hospitality, the operator of over 80 restaurants across India, including well-known brands like ‘Mamagoto,’ ‘Dhaba,’ and ‘Sly Granny.’ PPL alleged that Azure was playing copyrighted sound recordings from its catalogue without obtaining the necessary licenses.
On March 3, 2025, a single judge of the Delhi High Court issued an interim injunction restraining Azure from using PPL’s copyrighted songs in its restaurants, finding that PPL had made a prima facie case of copyright infringement. The court also noted that Azure had not denied playing the copyrighted recordings.
However, when Azure challenged the injunction, a division bench of the High Court modified the single judge’s order. The bench held that PPL, not being a registered copyright society, could not issue licenses unless it registered as a copyright society or became a member of one, under Section 18(1) of the Copyright Act.
To balance the equities between the parties, the division bench did not fully lift the temporary injunction but modified it. It directed Azure to make payments to PPL in accordance with the RMPL tariff for using PPL’s recordings, pending the final resolution of PPL’s suit.
Supreme Court’s Observations
During the hearing of the SLP, Justice Oka questioned the High Court’s direction for Azure to make payments based on the RMPL tariff, stating:
“How such order can be passed? It was not prayed for also. Such order cannot be passed.”
Justice Oka further explained that since the division bench had modified the single judge’s injunction, the injunction could not be reinstated unless the Supreme Court made a final decision in the case. He also noted that the Court was not yet deciding on the case’s merits, and therefore, the entire division bench’s judgment could not be stayed.
Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing PPL, argued that the entire judgment of the division bench should be stayed, rather than just the payment direction. However, Justice Oka rejected this request, stating:
“That we will not stay. How can we stay the judgment? Today we are not deciding it finally.”
The Supreme Court has now issued notice in the matter, with the next hearing scheduled for July 21, 2025.
Case Details
Case Title: Phonographic Performance Ltd. v. Azure Hospitality Private Limited
Case Number: SLP(C) No. 10977/2025
