SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Mad) 1776

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
R. Subbiah, Sathi Kumar Sukumara Kurup, JJ.
Deepa Jayakumar - Appellants
Vs.
A.L. Vijay and Ors. - Respondent
O.S.A. No. 75 of 2020, C.M.P. Nos. 2945, 2946 and 9240 of 2020
Decided On : 16-04-2021

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Arun C. Mohan for P. Saikumaran
For the Respondents: P.S. Raman, Senior Counsel for Vijaya Subramanian and Satish Parasaran, Senior Counsel for A.K. Raghavulu

The right to privacy of an individual extinguishes with death and is not inheritable.

Headnote:

RIGHT TO PRIVACY - POSTHUMOUS RIGHT - INHERITABILITY - FILM ON FORMER CHIEF MINISTER - INJUNCTION - FILM BASED ON BOOK - RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION - CBFC CERTIFICATION - WEB SERIES - FICTIONAL WORK - DISCLAIMER - BALANCE OF CONVENIENCE - PUBLIC DOMAIN INFORMATION - PUBLIC FIGURE - RIGHT TO PRIVACY EXTINGUISHES WITH DEATH - NO INHERITABILITY OF RIGHT TO PRIVACY - NO INJUNCTION AGAINST FILM OR WEB SERIES.

Fact of the Case:

Appellant, claiming to be the Class I legal heir of former Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu, Dr. J. Jayalalitha, filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction to restrain respondents from producing a film and web series on the life of Dr. Jayalalitha without her consent. Respondents claimed the film was based on a book and the web series was a fictional work inspired by true events. The trial court dismissed the application for interim injunction.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the right to privacy of an individual extinguishes with death and is not inheritable. The film was based on a book in the public domain and the web series was a fictional work with a disclaimer. The court also noted that the film was subject to CBFC certification and the appellant could re-apply for an injunction if aggrieved by the portrayal of Dr. Jayalalitha after viewing the film.

Issues: 1. Whether the posthumous right of the former Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu is inheritable by the appellant to restrain the respondents from releasing the web series or film? 2. Whether the film and web series infringe the right to privacy of the appellant?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The right to privacy of an individual extinguishes with death and is not inheritable. 2. The film was based on a book in the public domain and the web series was a fictional work with a disclaimer. 3. The film was subject to CBFC certification and the appellant could re-apply for an injunction if aggrieved by the portrayal of Dr. Jayalalitha after viewing the film.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the trial court's order refusing to grant an injunction against the film and web series.

JUDGMENT :

R. Subbiah, J.

1. This Original Side Appeal (O.S.A.) has been filed as against the order dated 12.12.2019 made in O.A. No. 1102 of 2019 in C.S. No. 697 of 2019 by the learned Single Judge dismissing the Original Application filed by the appellant herein for interim injunction to restrain the respondents 1 to 3 from in any manner making, releasing, publishing, exhibiting publicly or privately selling, promoting or advertising or entering into film festival or otherwise producing in any format, any film, drama, serial, tele-serial, web serial or any other literary or artistic expression in respect of the life of Dr. J. Jayalalitha, the former Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu and/or her family members and their direct descendants without the consent of the applicant/plaintiff, pending disposal of the suit which has been filed for declaration and permanent injunction.

2. The brief facts which are necessary for disposal of this appeal are as follows.

3. It is the case of the appellant that she is the brother's daughter of former Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu late. Dr. J. Jayalalitha, a well known public personality and who had acquired very good name, image and reputation in the midst of the people of Tamilnadu and all over India as a political leader. She had established a great name for the political party-All India Anna Dravidar Munnetra Kalagam (AIADMK) founded by Late. Dr. M.G. Ramachandran, former Chief Minister of the State of Tamil Nadu. Further, Late Dr. J. Jayalalitha is the aunt of the appellant/Deepa Jayakumar. As a family member of Late. Dr. J. Jayalalitha, the appellant/plaintiff acquainted herself in various parts of her life and has been present along with her on important occasions.

4. According to the appellant, the respondents 1 and 2 herein have announced through Press and Media that they are producing a film on the biography of late. Dr. J. Jayalalitha titled as "Thalaivi" in Tamil and "Jaya" in Hindi. They have planned to produce and release the said films on the life story of Dr. J. Jayalalitha as a bi-lingual film for their commercial and monetary benefits, without the consent of the appellant/plaintiff.

5. The third respondent has come forward to make a Web series on the life story of Dr. J. Jayalalitha. The third respondent has planned to produce the web serial on the life story of Dr. J. Jayalalitha for his commercial and monetary benefits, without the consent of the appellant/plaintiff. The life story of Dr. J. Jayalalitha cannot be filmed without adding the life of the appellant/plaintiff and her relatives as part of the film. In such an event, the same would amount to invading into the privacy of the appellant/plaintiff, more so, the appellant/plaintiff was not aware of the story, script or screen play and dialogue prepared by the respondents in the process of producing the said movie and for the web serial. The appellant/plaintiff apprehends that while the respondents/defendants portray Dr. J. Jayalalitha and her personal life in the life story, the plaintiff's part in the life story, may also be depicted by the respondents/defendants in their own version, which may affect the family privacy of the appellant/plaintiff. Therefore, the appellant/plaintiff contended that the personality rights of her aunt Dr. J. Jayalalitha and the interest of her family's privacy, had to be safeguarded. Hence, it is absolutely necessary that, in the absence of any consent and approval of the story, script, screenplay etc., by the appellant/plaintiff, the respondents/defendants should not be permitted to proceed with the production of the said film or web serial or releasing the same for public exhibition.

6. The apprehension of the appellant/plaintiff is that, during the production of the film, the respondents/defendants may interpolate the scenes which would affect the dignity and reputation of Dr. J. Jayalalitha, while narrating the story, for their commercial enrichment. Therefore, it is contended by the appellant/pla

                Click Here to Read the rest of this document
                1
                2
                3
                4
                5
                6
                7
                8
                9
                10
                11
                SupremeToday Portrait Ad
                supreme today icon
                logo-black

                An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

                Please visit our Training & Support
                Center or Contact Us for assistance

                qr

                Scan Me!

                India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

                For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

                whatsapp-icon Back to top