In a landmark decision that has shocked India’s classical music and entertainment sectors, the Delhi High Court recently decided against well-known music composer A.R. Rahman and production companies Madras Talkies & Lyca Productions in a copyright dispute involving the song “Veera Raja Veera” from the 2023 Tamil film Ponniyin Selvan: II.
Respected Hindustani classical music master Ustad Faiyaz Wasifuddin Dagar started the lawsuit, alleging that “Veera Raja Veera” was a perfect copy of “Shiva Stuti,” a composition by his father and uncle, sometimes referred to as the Junior Dagar Brothers internationally.
Following a preliminary review, the court decided that the two works had notable similarities and issued an interim relief mandating the defendants pay a deposit of ₹2 crore. The court also directed credit for the original musicians whenever the song or film is shown or distributed.
Cause of the conflict
Padma Shri laureate and Dhrupad tradition stalwart Ustad Faiyaz Wasifuddin Dagar in 2023 claimed that “Veera Raja Veera” plagiarized “Shiva Stuti” in terms of melody, emotional impact, and musical structure without permission or recognition.
Composer and performer of “Shiva Stuti,” the Junior Dagar Brothers—Ustad Nasir Faiyazuddin Dagar and Ustad Nasir Zahiruddin Dagar—played a crucial role in bringing the 20th century Dhrupad style to a worldwide audience.
Though the Dhrupad genre is a historic form, the plaintiff claimed that the composition in issue was an original work meticulously produced and performed by the Junior Dagar Brothers, so underlining copyright protection.
Defense and Counterarguments
Rahman’s legal team argued that “Shiva Stuti” belonged in the traditional Dhrupad genre and that since traditional art forms are public domain and cannot be susceptible to individual copyright claims.
Because of its cultural and historical roots, they contended that no one artist or family could assert ownership of the song.
The court rejected this claim by separating a style (like Dhrupad) from a specific composition inside that form. Although Dhrupad is an ancient musical tradition, Justice Singh underlined that under the Copyright Act individual creative interpretations—especially when they are arranged, performed, and recorded in an original manner—are entitled to protection.
Consequently, “Shiva Stuti” by the Junior Dagar Brothers was recognized as an original, protected work rather than merely a folk or traditional song fit for use without limitation.
Conclusion of the Court
After going over the “Shiva Stuti” and “Veera Raja Veera” recordings, Justice Prathiba M. Singh, the presiding judge for the case, offered some harsh comments.
According to the court’s ruling, the two songs were “not just inspired but are identical in material aspects” as judged by the typical listener.
The Court noticed:
- The two works had shockingly similar melodic forms.
- There was somewhat similar emotional resonance and musical arrangement.
- Though the lyrics were different, “Veera Raja Veera” had an essentially similar underlying composition to “Shiva Stuti.”
Justice Singh underlined that a modification in the words by itself does not clear copyright infringement if the musical score is basically the same.
Interim Relief
While the lawsuit was in progress, the court issued several important temporary measures.
- Deposit of ₹2 Crore: Ordering A.R. Rahman, Madras Talkies, Lyca Productions to pay ₹2 crore to the Delhi High Court as a deposit to cover possible damages,
- Attribute to Original Artists: All streaming platforms and digital formats that provide Ponniyin Selvan: II had to change their credits in order to honor the Junior Dagar Brothers.
- Legal Costs: Ustad Wasifuddin Dagar was directed to get an interim payment of ₹2 lakh as help to partially offset the lawsuit expenses.
The Court underlined that these were temporary actions and that the last decision would follow a comprehensive trial weighing all the evidence and arguments.
Consequences for Indian Music Business
This case results in significant suffering for India’s vibrant but sometimes uncontrolled creative sectors.
It first underlines that classical and folk traditions can nevertheless create original works deserving of legal protection even if they are a part of shared cultural legacy. Calling anything “traditional” alone will not let one evade culpability for copying.
Second, it’s a caution to content creators, musicians, and directors who frequently find inspiration in devout, traditional, or classical sources. Due care on the ownership and sources of source materials is more crucial than it has ever been.
Furthermore, the lawsuit sets a standard for better appreciation for classical musicians and traditional artists whose contributions have often been underpaid and underappreciated in commercial adaptations.
Conclusion
Though the ultimate decision is still pending, the interim order in the “Veera Raja Veera” copyright case strongly indicates the rising dedication of the Indian court to preserving original artistic creations, even inside conventional genres.
For the globally renowned Academy Award winner A.R. Rahman, this dispute marks a rare legal setback. It marks a long-overdue respect of the ongoing influence on India’s musical and cultural legacy of the Junior Dagar Brothers.
Ultimately, this lawsuit might be a game-changer since it forces the entertainment industry to acknowledge and give credit to the several spectrum of classical contributions still influencing modern works.
Author Details: Aditya Krishna Gupta, 3rd year, BA LL.B. , Jiwaji University, Gwalior
Link to similar articles: https://jpassociates.co.in/azure-hospitality-vs-phonographic-performance/
