https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277634 Copyright was treated as movable, intangible property and not as immovable property under the Transfer of Property Act. The expression "other intangible thing" was read ejusdem generis with "reversion," so the provision did not impose a registration requirement for copyright assignments. The argument that copyright was an actionable claim was rejected because it did not fall within the statutory definition. The copyright statutes in force permitted assignment by a signed writing, and no compulsory registration of the assignment deed was required. Accordingly, copyright could be validly assigned by an unregistered instrument, and the defendants' assignment was proved valid. en-us Tue, 29 Nov 1938 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 14 Dec 2018 17:37:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277634 Copyright was treated as movable, intangible property and not as immovable property under the Transfer of Property Act. The expression "other intangible thing" was read ejusdem generis with "reversion," so the provision did not impose a registration requirement for copyright assignments. The argument that copyright was an actionable claim was rejected because it did not fall within the statutory definition. The copyright statutes in force permitted assignment by a signed writing, and no compulsory registration of the assignment deed was required. Accordingly, copyright could be validly assigned by an unregistered instrument, and the defendants' assignment was proved valid. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 29 Nov 1938 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277634