Bombay HC clears Manjrekar’s film for release, says ‘Shivaji Maharaj’ name cannot be monopolised

The Bombay High Court’s vacation bench has refused to stay the release of Punha Shivajiraje Bhosale, a Marathi film directed by Mahesh Manjrekar, after Everest Entertainment LLP claimed it was an unauthorised sequel to its 2009 production Mi Shivajiraje Bhosale Boltoy.

In an order made available on October 30, Justice Amit S. Jamsandekar observed that the plaintiff had approached the court “far too late” and failed to establish any case of copyright infringement or misrepresentation.

“There has been gross and inordinate delay on the part of the Plaintiff in approaching the Court to seek any equitable relief. The litigant who adopts a relaxed approach does not deserve any equity,” the court said, noting that Everest was aware of the new film since April but filed its case only on October 10, weeks before the scheduled October 31 release.

“The last-hour application seeking ad-interim relief ought to be discouraged and rejected,” the order added, citing earlier rulings that caution against injunctions sought on the eve of film releases.

Appearing for Everest Entertainment, advocate Ravindra Suryawanshi argued that the company held exclusive rights to the original film and its script under a 2008 production agreement and a 2013 addendum with Mr. Manjrekar, granting it control over sequels and derivative works. He contended that the new film replicated the storyline, characters, and dialogues, and used a title and poster design likely to mislead audiences.

Counsel for Mr. Manjrekar and one co-producer, advocate Harshad Bhadbhade, countered that Punha Shivajiraje Bhosale had an entirely different theme, centred on farmers’ distress and corruption.

Advocate Mandar Soman represented other producers, while advocate Kunal Mehta, assisted by Kunal Parekh and Nirali Atha of Dua Associates, appeared for Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd. They informed the court that the defendants had invested heavily in the project, including ₹1.25 crore on promotions.

Explaining copyright principles, Justice Jamsandekar said, “There can be no copyright in an idea, principle, subject-matter, themes, plots or historical or legendary facts and violation of the copyright in such cases is confined to the form, manner and arrangement and expression of the idea by the author of the copyrighted work.”

The court held that the defendants’ film was an “entirely new work,” stating, “The alleged copy is not a substantial and material one.”

On the question of titles, the court said, “I do not have any hesitation in saying that the Plaintiff cannot claim any goodwill or exclusivity in these names or titles,” referring to “Shivajiraje Bhosale” and “Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj.”

Finding no evidence of substantial copying, the court observed that the phrases cited by Everest were common Marathi expressions and that the poster’s font was standard and not protectable.

Rejecting the claim of passing off, Justice Jamsandekar said, “I find it very difficult to accept that the audience of Marathi films will be confused or deceived, or that there is any likelihood of the same while watching the impugned film.”

The court concluded that the balance of convenience lay with the defendants, who had already invested heavily in production and marketing.

The interim application will come up for final hearing on November 17. The film’s release on October 31 will proceed as scheduled.