•  •  Dark Mode

Your Interests & Preferences

I am a...

law firm lawyer
in-house company lawyer
litigation lawyer
law student
aspiring student
other

Website Look & Feel

 •  •  Dark Mode
Blog Layout

Save preferences

Even Rajinikanth needs affidavit sometimes: Ex-parte stay plea v Bollywood movie stealing his image, caricature, style

Rajinikanth:
Rajinikanth:

Tamil movie legend Rajinikanth, also less well known as Shivaji Rao Gaikwad, has filed a petition and managed a stay of the Bollywood movie Main Hoon Rajinikanth.

Madras high court Justice S Tamilvanan granted an interim injunction against Varsha Productions from releasing the film with the contentious title and content, reported the Times of India.

Mohan Associates partner Arun Mohan acted for the superstar and commented: “This is the first time in South India that a suit of such nature has been filed based on personality rights.”

According to Wikipedia:

The film tells the story of a Stupid, Funny and Wicked C.B.I Officer-cum-Contract Killer Rajinikanth Rao (Adithya Menon) who goes in for a 'Killing-Spree' undercover assignment from another Stupid, Funny and Wicked Millionaire Bachchan (Shakti Kapoor) to deliver R50 million hard cash back to him which is captured by a corrupt cop Hariprasad Venkatesh Naidu (Shabbir Ali).

Things gets awry when Hariprasad Venkatesh Naidu dies suddenly while making love to his beloved sex-worker Mallika (Kavita Radheshyam). Mallika who also happens to be a die hard fan of South Indian superstar Rajinikanth, sees a golden opportunity to grab the Bag full of money and run away. Mallika waits for Train back to her village Bhanpur at Hanumangarh Railway Station where Rajinikanth Rao comes in search for her with an intention to kill her and take back the money to where it belongs.

In the affidavit, Rajinikanth swore:

8. It is also a source of immense distress to the Applicant that the Respondent’s forthcoming feature film has scenes of immoral nature, which is entirely antithetical to the nature of films chosen by him and his image/reputation amongst the public. In having his name/image/caricature being associated with such feature film of immoral and promiscuous nature, the Applicant would be subject to defamation, slander and gross damage to vast reputation/goodwill amongst the public across the world and the Indian film industry, which has been built over the hard work of several years. Such gross besmirching of the Applicant’s image and reputation in public cannot be tolerated by the Applicant to any degree. The Applicant in order to resolve the same amicably caused a cease and desist notice dated 15.07.2014 on the Respondent to restrain from violation of the rights of the Applicant. The Respondent continues with its unlawful activities. The Applicant left with no other option has approached this Hon’ble Court.

9. The Applicant states that the Respondent has knowingly used the  Applicant’s name/image/caricature/style of delivering dialogues without any  permission or authorization whatsoever. The Respondent has deliberately  used the Applicant’s name/image/caricature/style of delivering dialogues in  its forthcoming feature film only with a malafide intention to derive illicit  benefits based upon the goodwill emanating from the well known personality  status of the Applicant. The unauthorized use of the Applicant’s  name/image/caricature/style of delivering dialogues in the Respondent’s  forthcoming film amounts to infringement of copyright, infiltration of  personality right and passing off besides being a gross violation of privacy,  being defamatory, slanderous and causing considerable confusion amongst  the public as to the association between the Applicant and the Respondent.  In  such  circumstances,  the  Applicant  has  suffered  considerable  embarrassment due to queries seeking his alleged shift in stance by allowing  others to use his image for movies of such low quality and immoral nature. 

10. The Applicant states that by using his name/image/caricature/style of  delivering dialogues, the Respondent has portrayed to the general public that  the Applicant has approved to the title and content of the Respondent’s  forthcoming feature film, and as to the said feature film being based on the  Applicant. The Applicant states that the sole intention of the Respondent of  using his name/image/caricature/style of delivering dialogues for their  forthcoming feature film is only to deceive the trade and public so as to make  the public believe as though the Applicant has approved the title and content  of the said film. The Applicant further states that such unauthorized use of  his name/image/caricature/style of delivering dialogues for its forthcoming  feature film is only with a malafide intention of misrepresentation and  seeking to make undue commercial gain by piggybacking on the Applicant’s  vast reputation, recognition and goodwill besides attempting to gain  commercially by indulging in mockery and defamation. The Respondent,  who is well aware of the goodwill and reputation enjoyed the Applicant has  adopted an identical and/or deceptively name/image/caricature/style of  delivering dialogues for its forthcoming feature film. Such use amounts to  misappropriation of common law rights vested with the Applicant and would  amounts passing off. It is therefore imperative that the Respondent ought to  be restrained from passing off by this Hon’ble Court. 

11. The Applicant has prima facie case in its favour as he is a man of high  esteem in the society and more particularly in the cine industry. The  applicant is a well acclaimed actor in the industry. The Applicant through his  hard work and persistence has attained immense knowledge and goodwill  that even a child would relate the name Rajinikanth only with that of the  applicant and none else. The reputation of the applicant is so high that even  a passing reference to the name Rajinikanth would be associated by the  general public only with that of the Applicant and none else. The Applicant  further states that the respondent in its forthcoming feature film ‘Main Hoon  Rajinikanth’ has used the name/image/caricature/style of delivering  dialogues of the applicant without his consent or permission in any manner  whatsoever and is trying to make unlawful benefits out of the same. The  applicant further states that such use of his name/image/caricature/style of  delivering dialogues by the respondent in its forthcoming feature film  amounts to infiltration of his personality rights, copyright and passing off.

Photo by Surian Soosay

Click to show 1 comment
at your own risk
(alt+c)
By reading the comments you agree that they are the (often anonymous) personal views and opinions of readers, which may be biased and unreliable, and for which Legally India therefore has no liability. If you believe a comment is inappropriate, please click 'Report to LI' below the comment and we will review it as soon as practicable.