the Karnataka High Court has granted an interim stay on the Bangalore District Consumer Commission's directive against PVR Cinemas. The order, which was stayed until March 27, had previously held the multiplex chain liable for compensating a consumer due to prolonged advertisements delaying a movie screening.

Justice M. Nagaprasanna, while hearing a petition filed by the Multiplex Association of India, observed that the consumer forum had exceeded its jurisdiction by issuing directions on how theatres should operate.

Consumer Forum Oversteps Its Jurisdiction

In his order, Justice Nagaprasanna remarked:

"The Consumer forum accepts the plea of the petitioner and answers the complaint as if it has jurisdiction akin to a public interest petition. It indulges in a discourse about how a movie show should be run and directs that the theatres should not project advertisements, as it would become unfair trade practice. All these directions of the consumer forum are on the face of it without jurisdiction."

Read Also:- Madras High Court Orders CBCID Probe Against Law Firm Over Alleged Illegal Land Dealings

The High Court also rejected the government’s argument that petitioners should seek an appellate remedy before the State Consumer Forum, stating:

"While that may be that, an appeal remedy will not halt or put shackles on the hand of this court in exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution. More so, when it comes across a case where the concerned fora or court has acted in blatant violation of jurisdiction."

Considering the nature of the case, the High Court granted an interim stay and issued notices to the Respondent-State and the complainant, Abhishek M.R.

Background of the Case

The complaint originated when Abhishek M.R. booked three tickets for the movie Sam Bahadur at a PVR Cinemas theatre in Bangalore. He paid Rs. 825.66 for the tickets, expecting the movie to start at 4:05 PM. However, the actual screening was delayed due to prolonged advertisements, causing an additional wait time of 25 minutes.

Before the Consumer Commission, the complainant argued that this delay amounted to a deficiency in service, as his losses were beyond monetary calculation. The forum agreed, stating:

"The opposite parties had violated the government order, as per which the theatres could play 10 minutes of public service announcements and welfare schemes of the Central Government and State Government."

It further noted that the theatre should have started the movie at the scheduled time and that advertisements should have been played before 4:05 PM.

Consumer Forum’s Directives to PVR Cinemas

As part of its ruling, the Consumer Commission had directed PVR Cinemas and PVR Inox Ltd. to:

• Clearly mention the actual movie start time on cinema tickets.
• Compensate the complainant with Rs. 20,000 for mental agony and inconvenience.
• Pay Rs. 8,000 towards litigation expenses.
• Deposit Rs. 1,00,000 as punitive damages into the Consumer Welfare Fund.

Read Also:- Madras High Court Stays ED's Attachment Of Director Shankar’s Property Over Copyright Dispute

During the High Court hearing, Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing the petitioner, highlighted the larger implications of the case:

"Mischief mongers have already started creating problems against us. The council has no jurisdiction to do this."

The case is expected to set a precedent regarding the role of consumer forums in regulating theatre operations.

Case Details:

• Case Title: Multiplex Association of India & ANR vs. State of Karnataka & Others
• Case No: WP 5877/2025
• Legal Representation: Mukul Rohatgi, Uday Holla, Sahil Narang, Nikhilesh Rao, Karun Mehta, Madhavam Sharma, Avinash Balakrishna, Ayushman Kacker, Vidush Sinha, and Yugam Taneja

With the interim stay in place, the case will now be further examined in subsequent hearings.