IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
C.V. KARTHIKEYAN, J.
Dr. P. Kalidas – Plaintiff
Versus
V. Arun Vijay @ Arunkumar and Ors. – Defendants
CS.No.527of 2010
Decided On : 17-11-2016
Film Industry - Breach of Contract - Tamil Nadu Film Exhibition (Regulation) Act, 1955, Section 3 - Permanent Injunction - Financial Loss - Mental Agony - Exparte Evidence - Damages - Non-cooperation - Delay in Film Release - Dubbing Dispute - Loss of Credibility - Legal Provisions discussed: Tamil Nadu Film Exhibition (Regulation) Act, 1955, Section 3
Fact of the Case:
The Plaintiff, a Medical Surgeon and film distributor, filed a suit against the 1st Defendant, an Actor, seeking damages for financial loss and mental agony due to the 1st Defendant's non-cooperation, delay in film release, and dubbing dispute.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the 1st Defendant liable for the Plaintiff's financial and mental hardship due to breach of contract and non-cooperation. The court held the 1st Defendant liable for damages of Rs.1,00,000 with costs.
Issues: The issues involved breach of contract, delay in film release, non-cooperation, and financial loss suffered by the Plaintiff.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the 1st Defendant's non-cooperation and breach of contract caused financial and mental hardship to the Plaintiff, leading to the award of damages.
Final Decision: The civil suit was decreed against the 1st Defendant for a sum of Rs.1,00,000 with costs, while the suit against the Defendants 2 and 3 was dismissed.
This civil suit has been filed to pass a judgment and decree, against the Defendants:-
(a) directing the 1st Defendant to pay a sum of Rs.25,00,000/- (Rupees twenty five lakhs only) towards the financial loss and mental agony.
(b) granting permanent injunction restraining the Defendants 1 and 2 from releasing the film “Manja Velu” till the payment of damages to the Plaintiff.
(c) directing the 1st Defendant to pay the costs of the suit to the Plaintiff.
2. The Plaintiff, a Medical Surgeon is the distributor and producer of films and has been in the film industry for 15 years. He had produced a Tamil Film 'Thunechal', in which the 1st Defendant, who was an Actor, had acted as the Hero and his remuneration was fixed at Rs.10 lakhs. At the time of producing the film in the year 2005, the Plaintiff had claimed that the 1st Defendant had consecutive flops of 14 films and consequently, his remuneration was only Rs.3 to 4 lakhs. However, the budget of the said Film 'Thunechal' was about Rs.2 crores and the 1st Defendant had received a sum of Rs.5 lakhs as advance. It had been claimed that the 1st Defendant was not cooperative and at his instance, the heroine of the film was also changed and the amount paid to the previous heroine was also not recovered. The shooting of the film was completed in the year 2007 and the post production work was completed in June 2008 and the film audio was released in 2008. Since the 1st Defendant did not come for dubbing of the film, it could not be released in the year 2008. A complaint was given to the Producers Council, which advised the 1st Defendant to cooperate. The marketing of the film had got affected and because of the attitude of the 1st Defendant, the Plaintiff was forced to dub the film with a third person. This leads to the complaint given by the 1st Defendant and his father to the Artists Association and consequently, the Plaintiff had given a letter, stating that the matter will be settled. The 1st Defendant had also given a letter to the Prasad Laboratories not to give the negatives of the film on the ground that the Plaintiff had to pay a further sum of Rs.5 lakhs. With the intervention of the Producers and Artists Council members, the matter was finally resolved on 24.12.2009. The date of release of the film was fixed as 31.12.2009 and the 1st Defendant had to come for dubbing the voice on 25.12.2009, but he came only on 28.12.2009 at 11.50 p.m. and dubbing was done only upto 12.10 a.m. and he came again on 29.12.2009 between 9.30 p.m. and 11.30 p.m. and finally on 30.12.2009 between 10.00 a.m. and 3.00 p.m. and completed the film.
3. In the mean while, it had been further stated that the 1st Defendant and his father in law had started a film 'Malai Malai' in the year 2008 and the 1st Defendant, without informing the Plaintiff, went to America for training for the film. This also lead to a delay in releasing the film 'Thunechal. The 1st Defendant, thereafter, had stated that some scenes in the film had to be re-shooted and one more song had to be added. The Plaintiff informed that he had invested Rs.1.5 crores and the 1st Defendant warned that he will not allow the film to be released.
4. As aforesaid, the date for releasing the film was fixed and publicity was issued from November 2009. Finally, the Plaintiff had booked 160 theatres all over the Tamil Nadu for release of the film, but the 1st Defendant gave an interview to the Press, which was published in the Tamil Daily 'Dinakaran' dated 29.12.2009 that he had problems with the producer of the film 'Thunechal'. This also lead to loss of credibility in the film market. The 1st Defendant further informed about the shooting of his another film “Manja Velu” and hence, he could not come for dubbing in time. Finally, after much delay, the film was released on 1.1.2010 in 16 theatres only. Since digital film was required, the digital film of 'Thunechal' was released on 8.1.2010 and the film could not run for many days since due to Po
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.