Animal: Delhi HC Summons Respondents in Cine1 Studio Suit, Seeks Stay on Ranbir Kapoor's Movie Release Across OTT Platforms

The Delhi High Court on Thursday issued summons on the suit filed by Cine1 Studios Private Limited, one of the co-producers of the movie Animal seeking a stay of release of the movie in OTT platforms. The suit has been filed against Super Cassettes Industries Private Limited (T-Series), seeking direction to restrain releasing the film "Animal" on any Over-the-Top (OTT) platform, any digital streaming platform or any satellite broadcast. Animal Review: From Nazi Symbolism to 'Big Pelvis' Scene, 15 WTF Moments in Ranbir Kapoor-Sandeep Reddy Vanga's Film That Felt Crude, Depraved and Even Illogical! (SPOILER ALERT).

Justice Sanjeev Narula, after admitting the suit, issued summons to defendants and granted time to file a written statement. Justice Narula directed, "Along with the written statement(s), Defendants shall also file an affidavit(s) of admission/ denial of the documents of the Plaintiff, without which the written statement(s) shall not be taken on record." The bench granted liberty to Plaintiff to file a replication(s) within 15 days of receipt of the written statement(s).

The court also said that along with the replication(s), if any, filed by the Plaintiff, affidavit of admission/ denial of documents of thedefendants be filed by the plaintiff, without which the replication(s) shall not be taken on record. The matter has been listed before the Joint Registrar for completion of pleadings and marking of exhibits on 15th March, 2024. Thereafter the matter will be listed before the court for framing of issues. The bench noted that Senior Counsel Sandeep Sethi, senior counsel for plaintiff, relied upon an affidavit on behalf of the plaintiff, along with certain relevant documents, to explain the stand in respect of this second amendment agreement.

On the previous date of hearing, counsel for the plaintiff was granted time to take instructions with regard to the document presented by Senior advocate Amit Sibal, Senior Counsel for T Series, purported to be the second amendment agreement executed between the parties on 2nd August, 2022

The bench has directed to file their reply by 11 am on January 20, plaintiff is permitted to file rejoinder(s) thereto, if any, by end of day.

The court also permitted the Counsel for the parties are also permitted to file brief note of submissions, if any, not exceeding three pages, along with relevant case law(s), before the next date of hearing. The matter has been listed on January 22, 2024 for further submissions. CINE1 Studios Private Limited (Plaintiff) claims that Super Cassettes Industries Pvt Ltd entered into an acquisition agreement dated September 11, 2019 and a letter dated October 13, 2021, and another agreement titled amendment agreement to the acquisition agreement dated August 2, 2022.

Under the agreement, the plaintiff agreed to assign its right of first refusal and last matching right to produce the second Hindi film to be directed by Vanga Sandeep Reddy to Defendant No. 1. The parties agreed that they would each have 35 per cent ownership of the 'Derivative Rights' and 'Intellectual Property Rights' of cinematograph film to be so produced. It was also agreed that the plaintiff would be entitled to 35 per cent of the profit share. The agreement and amendment agreement laid down various other rights and obligations in favour of the parties thereto, as stated in the suit. The plaintiff Cine1 studio claimed that the Super Cassettes consistently breached its contractual rights. Animal Movie Review: Ranbir Kapoor's Provocative Performance Can't Rescue Sandeep Reddy Vanga's Exhausting and Disturbing Ode to Toxic Masculinity (LatestLY Exclusive).

Senior Advocate Sandeep Sethi appeared for the plaintiff in the matter and according to the suit, "Super Cassettes has not only released the film without the approval, consent or consultation of the plaintiff, but it has also incurred expenses for making, promoting, and releasing the film without the plaintiff's approval or consent and received revenues from box office sales but failed to disclose or disburse any sums to the plaintiff."

Furthermore, the defendant has also failed to disclose the final cost of production for the film, suit stated. According to the suit, apart from the above financial breaches, the defendant failed to consult, get consent and get approval from the plaintiff about the release of the pre-teaser, trailer, and other promotional materials for the film. "It also failed to ensure that the contractually agreed credits (including logos) are duly accorded and are of equal prominence in all modes of promotion as well as the film, failed to get the censor certificate issued in the joint name of the plaintiff and defendant, and failed to consult or obtain consent in regards to the marketing and publicity plan," the suit mentioned.

Senior Advocate Amit Sibal, who appeared for T-Series, stated that an amendment dated August 2, 2022, was made to the original contract by which Cine1 allegedly gave up all its intellectual property and derivative rights in the film and took Rs 2.6 crores for it. The bench of Justice Sanjeev Narula on Monday, after noting down the submissions, fixed the matter for further hearing on Thursday and granted time to the plaintiff's counsel to obtain instructions regarding this amendment agreement. Animal Movie Review: Ranbir Kapoor's Provocative Performance Can't Rescue Sandeep Reddy Vanga's Exhausting and Disturbing Ode to Toxic Masculinity (LatestLY Exclusive).

Plaintiff's counsel assures the court that their client will be present in person in court on Thursday. According to the suit, the defendant has entered into an agreement with Netflix India for granting internet exploitation rights and Sony Pictures Networks India for granting satellite rights to the film. "In accordance with its consistent conduct, the defendant, Super Cassettes, has failed to share any details regarding the same with the plaintiff," it mentioned. In view of the defendant's conduct, the plaintiff moves the Delhi High Court to assert that its contractual rights against the defendant ought not to be allowed to release the film on any digital or satellite platforms without first remedying the breaches committed by it, according to suit.