Madras High Court Restrains Actor Vishal From Releasing Any Movie Until He Deposits ₹15 Crore To Credit Of Suit Filed By Lyca Productions

Vishal had taken a loan from GN Anbu Chezhian of Gopuram Films to the tune of Rs 21.29 crore along with interest. When these amounts remained unpaid, Lyca Productions stepped in and paid Anbu Chezhian on the promise that Vishal will repay Lyca the entire amount along with interest at the rate of 30% per annum, calculated on diminishing balance.

When this amount remained unpaid, Lyca had approached the High Court wherein the court had directed him to make a fixed deposit for ₹15 crore to the credit of the civil suit and hand over the original FD receipts to the Registrar of the High Court. This FD was initially for a period of one year and was to be renewed till the disposal of the suit.

The bench of Acting Chief Justice T Raja and Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy were hearing the original side appeal filed by the actor challenging this direction by the single judge.

Vishal contended that he had not borrowed any money from Lyca. Further, Lyca's cause of action was challenged and it was submitted that there were discrepancies in Lyca's submissions.

However, relying on the agreement, Lyca submitted that the documents clearly stated that they would undertake Vishal's loan account and in return Vishal had to repay Lyca. They also furnished the Statement of Accounts to prove payment of the amount to the third party.

After perusing the documents, the court was satisfied that there was a debt and Vishal was liable to repay Lyca. The court also noted that the single judges order was for balancing the interest of both the sides and to ensure that the litigant was able to realise his claim within a reasonable time.

The learned Single Judge after considering the totality of the circumstances and after considering the commercial costs, held that the endeavour has to be made to make sure that the litigant claiming the relief should be in a position to realise the substantive claim within a Reasonable Time.

The court however opined that the single judge had failed to list out the consequence of not fulfilling the court directions. To this extent, the court deemed it fit to further restrain Vishal from releasing any of his movies till the deposit of such amount.

However, the learned Single Judge has not specified the consequence of non compliance in the Order itself. To that extent it is necessary to modify the order of the Learned Single Judge by adding Clause (iv-a) to the order...

Case Title: Vishal Krishna Reddy v Lyca Productions

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 112