Delhi HC told Super Cassettes, Cine 1 Studios settled dispute on release of 'Animal' on OTT platform

Animal, directed by Sandeep Reddy Vanga, was released in theatres on December 1

Delhi High Court was informed on Monday that Super Cassettes and Cine 1 Studios -- the co-producers of 'Animal' -- have settled their dispute regarding alleged violation of contractual obligations relating to the Bollywood film.

Cine 1 Studios had filed a suit in the high court against Super Cassettes and sought to restrain the release of the film on digital streaming platforms and its satellite broadcast.

The film, directed by Sandeep Reddy Vanga, was released in theatres on December 1. It is set to be released on Netflix on January 26.

On Monday, the counsel for Cine 1 Studios and Super Cassettes told Justice Sanjeev Narula that a settlement agreement was signed between the two parties and it will be brought on record.

The high court noted the submissions of the lawyers and asked them to bring on record the agreement and listed the matter for consideration on January 24.
On January 18, the high court issued summons to Super Cassettes Industries Private Limited, Netflix India and Cluver Max Entertainment Private Limited (formerly Sony Pictures Networks Limited), with which an agreement was signed for granting of the film's satellite rights, on the suit and sought their responses.

It had said the three defendants must also file affidavits of admission or denial of the documents produced by the plaintiff, without which their written statements would not be taken on record.

While Cine 1 Studios had claimed a breach of agreement and said it was not paid a single penny, Super Cassettes contended that Rs 2.6 crore was paid to the plaintiff that it did not disclose to the court.

However, Cine 1 Studios' counsel had argued that the document shown was allegedly "ex-facie forged and fabricated." The plaintiff, in its interim plea, sought a stay on the release of the film on OTT, digital and satellite platforms.

The Cine 1 Studios' counsel had said the plaintiff did not get any information about the revenue the film earned, its collection at the box office, the music, satellite or Internet rights.

The suit said the two production houses had entered into an agreement to produce the film. Under the agreement, Cine 1 Studios claimed it had a 35 per cent profit share and was entitled to 35 per cent intellectual property rights in the film.

It further claimed that without Cine 1 Studios' approval, Super Cassettes incurred expenses for making/promoting/releasing the film, and received revenues from box office sales but did not share the details with it. Super Cassettes also did not pay any money to the plaintiff despite the profit-share agreement, it claimed.
Super Cassettes' counsel had submitted that the plaintiff invested no money in the film and all expenses were borne by his client.