NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court has issued summons to Super Cassettes and Netflix on a suit filed by Cine 1 Studios, a co-producer of Ranbir Kapoor-starrer film 'Animal' seeking to restrain its release on digital streaming platforms as well as satellite broadcast.
Ahead of 'Animal's OTT release on Netflix from January 26, the co-producer company was approaching the Delhi High Court alleging that the film producer T-Series did not pay its share in the film's intellectual property rights. The movie directed by Sandeep Reddy Vanga was released in theatres on December 1, 2023.
While issuing summons to Super Cassettes Industries Pvt Ltd, a co-producer of the film, and Cluver Max Entertainment Pvt Ltd (formerly known as Sony Pictures Networks Ltd), Justice Sanjeev Narula also asked them to file affidavits of admission or denial of the documents produced by the plaintiff.
"Thus, let the plaint be registered as a suit. Issue summons," ordered Delhi High Court.
In the previous hearing, Cine 1 submitted that they got no details about the revenues from box office sales along with the digital and satellite rights of the movie.
T series did not provide the agreement copies related to the digital and satellite rights of the film with Netflix and Culver Max Entertainment (Sony Pictures) nor was any information given about the work tilted ‘Animal Park’, a derivative work of the movie Animal, the plaintiff argued.
It was also submitted that the client has "not been paid even a single penny."
On the other hand, senior advocate Amit Sibal, representing T-series said the plaintiff company had made no investment in the film.
Pointing out some documents, he argued that on August 2, 2022, the parties had executed two agreements, amendments to the Acquisition Agreement of September 11, 2019. The plaintiff had concealed this critical and material information from this court, Sibar argued.
As per the plea "the Defendant No 1 (T-Series) is bent upon destroying the plaintiffs rights in the film and its derivatives in a brazen manner."
It added that "The plaintiff is seeking preservation of the accounts of the defendant no. 1 because the revenue generated from the film will be delivered only to the defendant no. 1. The defendant no. 1 being a trustee of the profit share of the plaintiff cannot be allowed to dissipate such receipts so as to defeat the plaintiffs rights on the profit share of the film."