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

2026 Supreme(Mad) 764

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N.SENTHILKUMAR, J.
Reliance Industries Limited – Applicant
Versus
Studio Green Films Private Limited, represented by its authorised Signatory, Gnanavelraja K.E. – Respondent
A. Nos.5823 to 5826 of 2025 in C.S.(CD) No.297 of 2025
Decided On : 09-01-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. R. Parthasarathy, Senior Counsel for Mr. Abishek Janasenan
For the Respondents: Mr. Vijayan Subramanian.

Interim relief denied due to lack of prima facie case regarding applicant's rights over a film's revenues and established contractual breaches.

Headnote:(A) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Order XIV Rule 8 - Application for interim reliefs relating to film production agreements - Applicant/plaintiff sought to direct respondents not to release any monies towards agreements relating to the film ‘Vaa Vaathiyaar’ pending suit - Applicant claimed breaches of contracts by the respondents. (Paras 1-5, 6-36)

(B) Contracts - Film Production Agreements - Allegations of failure to adhere to production timelines and obligations - Claims for refund of disbursed amounts and accrued interest presented - Respondents contended non-compliance of payment schedules by the applicant - Issues included rights over funds from exploitation of the film ‘Vaa Vaathiyaar’ and the existence of contractual obligations for refunds. (Paras 19, 24, 31)

(C) Principle of equity - Court exercised discretion under principles of equity and judicial process, concluding that the applicant failed to establish prima facie case for interim relief, as no direct financial interest in the film 'Vaa Vaathiyaar' was substantiated. (Paras 30-36)

Facts of the case:
The plaintiff, engaged in film production, claimed a sum of Rs. 25,98,00,000/- due to alleged breaches by the defendants of multiple film production agreements. The main contention was regarding the production of agreed films and the entitlement to funds from another unrelated film.

Findings of Court:
Application for interim orders dismissed; no prima facie case established for relief.

Issues: Main issues addressed included contractual obligations regarding the production of films, claims for repayment, and the applicant's rights over the film ‘Vaa Vaathiyaar’.

Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that the applicant failed to present a prima facie case justifying interim relief, given the absence of rights claimed over proceeds from the film 'Vaa Vaathiyaar', concluding that the applications were filed at an inappropriate time.

Result: Applications dismissed.

Table of Content
1. filing applications for financial settlements (Para 1 , 4 , 5)
2. details of production agreements shared (Para 6 , 7 , 8)
3. claims of breach of contract identified (Para 12 , 13 , 14)
4. responses to claims discussed (Para 21 , 22 , 23)
5. court finds case unconvincing (Para 30 , 35)
6. dismissal of applications affirmed (Para 36)

ORDER :

N. SENTHILKUMAR, J.

The present suit has been filed by the Plaintiff seeking recovery of a sum of Rs.22,00,00,000/- along with applicable GST amounting to Rs.3,98,00,000/- together aggregating to Rs.25,98,00,000/- along with interest at the rate of 14% from the date of disbursement till the date of realisation.

2.The application in A.No.5823 of 2025 has been filed to direct the respondents 3 to 6 and any of their agents/affiliates, not to release, pay, disburse or adjust any monies whatsoever to Respondents 1 and 2 under or in connection with the agreements relating to the film “Vaa Vaathiyaar”, including but not limited to advances, settlement amounts, revenue shares or any other consideration and further direct that all such amounts presently due and hereafter accruing be remitted directly to the credit of this suit pending disposal of the suit.

3.The application in A.No.5824 of 2025 has been filed to direct the respondents 3 to 6 to disclose on affidavit within 7 (seven) days:

(i)copies/summaries of all agreements with Respondents 1 and 2 concerning “Vaa Vaathiyaar”,

(ii)amounts already paid and amounts presently due or to become due, head-wise (theatrical/overseas, digital/OTT, satellite, music and ancillary), with payment schedules and bank coordinate and

(iii)any set-off/recoupment claims asserted by Respondents 1 and 2.

4.The application in A.No.5825 of 2025 has been filed to direct the respondents, their men, agents, distributors, assignees or any person claiming through them to pay and deposit to the credit of the suit forthwith and in any event within 48 hours of each receipt, without set-off or deduction, all gross proceeds, advances, settlements and other monies, whether now due or hereafter accruing, from the exploitation of the rights (including theatrical, non- theatrical, satellite, digital/OTT, music, remake, adaptation, underlying IP and ancillary rights) in the films “X Meets Y (Telugu)” and Untitled (Telugu remake of Indru Netru Naalai), or any part thereof pending disposal of the suit.

5.The application in A.No.5825 of 2025 has been filed to to direct the respondents 1 and 2, their men, agents, distributors, assignees or any person claiming through them to pay and deposit to the credit of the suit forthwith and in any event within 48 hours of each receipt, without set-off or deduction, all gross proceeds, advances, settlements and other monies, whether now due or hereafter accruing, from the exploitation of the rights (including theatrical, non- theatrical, satellite, digital/OTT, music, remake, adaptation, underlying IP and ancillary rights) in the films “Vaa Vaathiyaar” or any part thereof pending disposal of the suit.

6.Mr.R.Parthasarathy, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the applicant submitted that the plaintiff/applicant is running a media and entertainment division, who is one of the largest business conglomerate and engaged in the business of production, acquisition, exploitation and distribution of cinematograph films. The learned Senior Counsel also submitted that the first respondent is also engaged in the business of production of cinema and the second respondent is the Managing Director of the first respondent.

7.The learned Senior Counsel further submitted that the second respondent, who is having experience and market standing in the film industry, had approached the applicant for production, marketing and distribution of five full length feature films starring G.V.Prakash Kumar, Samyuktha, Allu Sirish, Vikram, Pasupathi, Arya, Sathyaraj, Vennela Kishore and others, which will be directed by reputed directors, such as Lokesh Mithun Krishnan, Pa.Ranj

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