The Calcutta High Court on Tuesday refused to interfere with an interim injunction restraining a publishing house from printing and selling the literary works of legendary author Narayan Debnath, just a day before a major book fair was set to begin in Kolkata.
A Division Bench of Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya and Justice Supratim Bhattacharya dismissed the appeal filed by Dev Sahitya Kutir Pvt. Ltd., holding that the trial court had acted correctly in protecting the copyright claimed by the author’s legal heirs.
Background of the Case
The dispute arose from a suit filed by Archana Debnath, widow of the late author, and one of his sons. They alleged that the publisher continued to print and commercially exploit Narayan Debnath’s literary and artistic works even after the expiry of a limited licensing agreement executed in 2012.
Read also:- Supreme Court Questions ₹2 Lakh Compensation in 13-Year-Old’s Death Case, Warns of Sentence Enhancement
According to the plaintiffs, the agreement was valid only for two years. Despite this, the publisher allegedly continued publication without paying appropriate royalties.
The plaintiffs also relied on a Will executed in 2020, by which Narayan Debnath bequeathed the copyright in his works to his son, appointing his wife as the executrix.
In January 2026, the District Judge at Alipore passed an ad-interim injunction restraining the publisher from printing, selling, or distributing the author’s works in any form, including online platforms.
Publisher’s Challenge Before the High Court
Challenging this order, the publisher argued that the injunction was granted at the last moment to deliberately disrupt sales during the upcoming book fair. Senior counsel for the appellant claimed that the plaintiffs had suppressed material facts, including an earlier suit filed by Narayan Debnath that was dismissed for default.
The publisher further argued that the suit itself was not maintainable because the plaintiffs had not yet obtained probate of the Will, and therefore lacked the legal authority to enforce copyright.
It was also contended that delay in approaching the court should have defeated the claim for injunction.
Court’s Observations
The Bench rejected each of these arguments after an extensive examination of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, and earlier Supreme Court judgments.
The Court clarified that although probate is necessary to finally establish rights under a Will, an executor or legatee is not powerless in the interim period.
Read also:- Supreme Court Steps In as ₹150 Crore Transactions Surface During Stalled Corporate Insolvency
“The executor is entitled to protect the estate of the deceased and take necessary legal steps until probate is granted,” the Bench observed.
On the issue of delay, the Court reiterated settled law that copyright infringement is a continuing wrong.
“In cases of copyright infringement, the cause of action arises day to day. Delay, therefore, cannot defeat the grant of injunction,” the judges noted.
The Bench also found no deliberate suppression of facts, pointing out that relevant orders from earlier litigation were already placed before the trial court.
Read also:- Delhi HC Allows Cash Transfer for School Uniforms, Clears Govt Policy Under RTE Act
Decision of the Court
Concluding that the trial judge had taken a legally sound and reasonable view, the High Court refused to substitute its own opinion at the interim stage.
“There was no error of law or fact in the impugned order,” the Court held while dismissing the appeal.
As a result, the interim injunction restraining the publisher from dealing with Narayan Debnath’s works remains in force. The connected application was also disposed of, with no order as to costs.
The Court clarified that its observations would not affect the final adjudication of the suit, which will proceed independently on its merits.
Case Title: Dev Sahitya Kutir Pvt. Ltd. v. Archana Debnath & Another
Case Number: FMAT 18 of 2026
Date of Judgment: 21 January 2026
Counsel
- For Appellant:
- Mr. Saptansu Basu, Senior Advocate
- Assisted by Mr. Ayan Banerjee and others
- For Respondents:
- Mr. Sardar Amjad Ali, Senior Advocate
- Assisted by Mr. Susandip Pathak and others
