Reviewed case brief
Amar Nath Sehgal v. Union of India
2005 (30) PTC 253 (Del)
The Delhi High Court recognised that an author's moral rights under Section 57 of the Copyright Act, 1957 include the right to prevent destruction or mutilation of their work, even after assignment of economic rights. The court ordered restoration of a mural that had been pulled down from Vigyan Bha
- Court
- Delhi High Court
- Year
- 2005
- Subjects
- Intellectual Property Law
- Reviewed
- 2026-06-18
Rule established
Moral rights under Section 57 survive assignment and protect against destruction of artwork
Facts
- Amar Nath Sehgal, a renowned artist, was commissioned to create a large bronze mural for the walls of Vigyan Bhawan in New Delhi
Issues
Held
- **Moral rights are independent of economic rights** and survive even after assignment of copyright
Ratio decidendi
Moral rights under Section 57 of the Copyright Act are perpetual and inalienable rights that vest in the author regardless of whether economic rights have been assigned. The destruction of a work of art constitutes the most extreme form of mutilation and prejudice to the author's honour and reputation, and is actionable even when the physical object is owned by another party.
How to use it in an exam
- Deploy when discussing the scope and nature of moral rights under Indian copyright law
Editorial source
2005 (30) PTC 253 (Del); verified via SCC Online
Educational summary only. Read the reported judgment or an authorised law report before relying on the case professionally.