Even before God Tussi Great Ho hits cinema halls on Friday, its producer Afzal Khan has been dragged to court over a dispute regarding the film’s satellite rights.
Following a dispute over the film’s satellite rights, Shemaroo has dragged the producer to high court
Even before God Tussi Great Ho hits cinema halls on Friday, its producer Afzal Khan has been dragged to court over a dispute regarding the film’s satellite rights.
Shemaroo Entertainment has filed a suit in Bombay High Court, seeking enforcement of an agreement it claims to have entered with Khan for the satellite telecast rights of the romantic comedy starring Salman Khan, Priyanka Chopra and Amitabh Bachchan.
The film, a remake of the Hollywood film Bruce Almighty, is scheduled to be released on August 15. On Monday, Shemaroo’s lawyer Virag Tulzapurkar sought ad-interim injunction on the film’s satellite rights being assigned to a third party till the case is decided by the court.
Khan’s lawyer Janak Dwarkadas opposed the plea, stating that his client had terminated the agreement as Shemaroo failed to make payments. After hearing both parties at length, the court fixed the case for orders on Tuesday.
Shemaroo claims that it bought the film’s satellite rights for Rs7 crore, which was to be paid in installments on certain specified dates. The rights were to be transferred six months after the release of the film. However, when it took out a public notice last March, Super Cassettes, which has bought the film’s music rights, objected to
Shemaroo using clips from the film’s songs for the promotions. Super Cassettes wrote to Shemaroo, saying that it could exercise its rights in respect of screening the entire film on television and not parts or clips of it.
Tulzapurkar stated that owing to Super Cassettes’ objection, an oral modification was made to the agreement with Khan and subsequently, Shemaroo paid Rs3 crore out of the total of Rs7 crore.
Khan denied that there was any breach on their part, or that an oral modification had been made to the original agreement. His lawyer said that the agreement was subject to timely payment of the installments. Dwarkadas said that the agreement had been terminated due to Shemaroo’s inaction and deliberate delay in making the payments. He added that his client was willing to return the money paid so far.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}