Delhi High Court on Friday reserved order on Fox Studios plea challenging the trial court order asking "Chhapaak" filmmakers to give credit to lawyer Aparna Bhat, who claims to have represented survivor Lakshmi in her legal battle.
The High Court will deliver its order on January 11.
Patiala House Court had on Thursday passed an order granting an ex-parte interim mandatory injunction against the petitioner and directed that the film "Chhapaak" has to carry the line -- Aparna Bhat continues to fight cases of sexual and physical violence against women during the screening of the film.
The petitioner, Fox Studios has requested the Delhi High Court to set aside the trial court order.
The petitioner submitted that if the order passed in a suit filed just one day before the release of the film, is not vacated, varied or modified, then the petitioner will suffer grave injustice and irreparable harm and injury.
The petitioner said that the judge has committed grave illegality in passing the order in as much as a mandatory order of injunction has been passed in favour of the plaintiff in the suit, without any notice or summons being issued to the defendants or having given the defendants an opportunity to contest the suit and the interim injunction application therein.
The petitioner said that it is gravely prejudiced by the order and in complete violation of principles of natural justice.
The petitioner said that the trial court judge has overlooked the fact that insertion of the line would require substantial effort and is time-consuming.
"Any process, modification/insertion would involve substantial resources, important time, and by no stretch of imagination, could be carried in a time period of less than 24 hours, i.e. the time available between the receipt of the order by the petitioner and the time of the release of the film," the plea said.
"It is also pertinent to note that the prints were dispatched to the various theatres well in advance of the release of the film. Thus, not only does the Impugned Order suffer from grave jurisdictional errors, the compliance of the order is also an impossibility," the plea added.
Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors


Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share


Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor


Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements


Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
