Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

"27. No case, in my view, for grant of any interlocutory injunction, as sought by the plaintiffs, exists, for the following reasons:

xxx xxx xxx A reading of para 121 of the plaint makes it apparent that, since October, 2019, the plaintiffs have been acutely aware of the possibility of release of the film, of which injunction is sought in the present plaint/application. It is no answer, to the delay in moving this Court, to say that, owing to intervention of COVID pandemic, the plaintiffs were under the impression that no shooting would take place or. that the film would not be released. Neither can it be the they expected due diligence on the part of any person seeking to produce a film based on "The White Tiger" and to be informed of any such proposal, prior thereto. There are several authorities for the proposition that a plaintiff who approaches the court at the eleventh hour, seeking interlocutory injunction against the release of a cinematographic film, is disentitled to any such relief. The relevant passages, from Biswaroop Roy Choudhary, Kanungo Media (P) Ltd., Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc. and Vinay Vats may, in this context, be reproduced:

(Emphasis supplied) (from Vinay Vats) Even on the sole ground of unconscionable delay in approaching this Court, therefore, the plaintiffs stand disentitled from seeking any interlocutory injunction against release of the film.

xxx xxx xxx

iii) In a case such as this, it is also not possible to hold, prima facie, that the prejudice that would result to the plaintiffs, were interlocutory injunction, as sought, not granted, is greater than that which would result to the defendants, were such injunction to be granted. The financial stakes, on both sides, are considerable. In case the defendants, as they assert, have been acting on the basis of rights validly assigned to them, there can obviously be no ground to injunct the release of the film. The release of a film is merely the culmination of a protracted exercise involving production, promotion and publicity, and I am, prima facie, inclined to agree with Mr. Sethi that if, at this point of time, release of the film is stayed, it will result in serious and irreparable repercussions to the defendants.

37. In Dr. Reddy's Laboratories Limited (supra), Plaintiff sought interlocutory injunction restraining the release of a film named 'Hathi Mere Sathi', titled 'Kaadan' in Tamil and 'Aranya' in Telugu, through various media platforms. On the question of delay in approaching the Court, it was held as follows:-