1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated: 08.05.2025 Coram: THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE N.MALA Original Application No.489 of 2025 The City Theatres Private Limited, Having its office at: New Theatres Building, P.Subramaniam Road, Thampanoor, Trivandrum, Kerala -695014 Represented by its Director, Priyadarsini Leela ...Applicant vs TSR Films Private Limited, Having its office at No.15, 5th Cross Street, Lake Area, Nungambakkam, Chennai-600 034 ...Respondent PRAYER:- Application filed under ORDER XIV Rule 8 of O.S.Rules read with Section 9(1)(ii)(e) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, to issue an order of interim injunction restraining the respondent, its affiliates, agents and officials from interfering with the projectors/DCE of the applicant pending disposal of arbitration. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2 For Petitioner: Mr.Jose John for M/s.King and Partridge For Respondent: Mr.KMD Muhilan for D.R.Law Chambers ORDER This application is filed for an interim injunction restraining the respondent, its affiliates, agents and officials from interfering with the projectors/DCE of the applicant pending disposal of arbitration. 2. The applicant is the owner of multiplex cinema screens in Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala in the name and style of 'New Theatre' and 'Sreekumar Theatre'. The applicant entered into an agreement with the respondent on 08.01.2021, for Film Projection Services (FPS) by installing the Digital Cinema Equipment (DCE) of the respondent in three screens on install, operate and transfer basis. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3 3. According to the applicant, the term of the agreement expired on 31.03.2024 and considering the fact that the theatres were not operational for few months on account of COVID-19, at the request of the respondent the applicant permitted the respondent to continue as its service provider for a further period of one year even though the balance investment of Rs.1.01 crore had also been recovered by the respondent. 4. The applicant issued a letter dated 01.01.2025 notifying the respondent that its advertisement rights had ceased and called upon the respondent to give effect to the termination of the agreement. The respondent failed to respond to the said letter. The applicant was constrained to discontinue the screening of advertisements. However, on 15.03.2025, the respondent sent an email to applicant informing imposition of lock on the projectors. 5. The respondent also filed OA No.277 of 2025, seeking for an interim injunction restraining the applicant from exhibiting any digital content using any other DCE other than that of the respondent as per agreement dated 08.01.2021, pending adjudication of disputes under the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4 agreement. 6. According to the applicant, the agreement had expired on 31.03.2024 and thereafter, the applicant became the absolute and unencumbered owner of the DCE since 01.04.2024. However, the respondents enforced lock on the projectors on 15.03.2025, which would become effective from 15.05.2025. If the lock became effective, the applicant would not be able to screen any of its content using its projectors from 15.05.2025, and therefore, the applicant was constrained to file the above application under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act, for an interim injunction restraining the respondent, its affiliates, agents and officials from interfering with the projectors/DCE of the applicant pending disposal of arbitration. 7. The respondent filed a detailed counter affidavit, stating that the agreement dated 08.01.2021, with the respondent for providing Film Projection and Audio Services by installing Digital Cinema Equipment (DCE) in the premises of the respondent for Screen 1, Screen 2 and Screen 3 for a term of 3 years, as per clause 12 of the agreement, was extended by https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 5 another two years till march 2026, upon consent of both parties due to disruption of theatre business owing to covid. 8. According to the respondent, the applicant arbitrarily terminated the agreement on 15.03.2025. The respondent denied the version of the applicant that the original agreement was extended only for one year and not for two years. 9. According to the respondent, when the agreement was valid and subsisting, the equipment squarely belonged to the respondent herein and the applicant could not maintain the present application against the respondent without any ownership over the equipment. The respondent therefore submitted that the applicant was not entitled for the claim and application filed by the applicant without any claim was illegal. The respondent therefore prayed for the dismissal of the application. 10. Heard the counsels and perused the materials available on record. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 6 11. The agreement dated 08.01.2021, and the endorsement attached to the agreement, clearly shows that the agreement dated 08.01.2021 was extended for a further period of two years vide endorsement dated 21.01.2024. The applicant denies that the agreement was extended by two years. In any event, the genuineness and validity of the endorsement will have to be decided in the main arbitration petition. For the time being, it is clear that the agreement is valid for two years. 12. Learned counsel for the respondent states that the respondent is ready to permit the applicant to screen his contents/movies in the projector DCE, provided the respondent is permitted to advertise his advertisements in the projector. 13. The learned counsel stated that insofar as revenue is concerned, the respondent undertakes to keep account of the revenue generated from the advertisements and undertakes to give a copy of the statement of account to the applicant. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 7 14. With the consent of both counsels, the following order is passed: i) The respondent shall permit the screening of the applicant's movies in projector DCE of the respondent pending disposal of the arbitration petition. ii) The applicant shall permit the respondent to screen the advertisement of the respondent without any hindrance or interference. iii) The respondent shall maintain an account of the revenue generated from the advertisements and furnish a copy of the same at the end of each month to the applicant. 15. Notwithstanding the above directions, it is made clear that it is solely the discretion of the arbitrator as to how the revenue generated from the advertisement and others aspects relating to the advertisement have to be dealt with. 16. The application stands disposed of. 09.05.2025 mrn https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 8 To TSR Films Private Limited, Having its office at No.15, 5th Cross Street, Lake Area, Nungambakkam, Chennai-600 034 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis