- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
DSK Legal files suits for Karan Johar for infringements of his Personality & Publicity rights in the movie “Shaadi Ke Director Karan Aur Johar” /“Shaadi Ke Director Karan Johar"

DSK Legal files suits for Karan Johar for infringements of his Personality & Publicity rights in the movie “Shaadi Ke Director Karan Aur Johar” /“Shaadi Ke Director Karan Johar"
DSK Legal files suits for Karan Johar for infringements of his Personality & Publicity rights movie name changed to “Shaadi Ke Director Karan Aur Johar”
The Bombay High Court on Friday refused to lift the stay on the release of the film 'Shaadi Ke Director Karan aur Johar' (“said Film”), holding that the movie’s title prima facie infringes filmmaker Karan Johar’s personality and publicity rights as well as the brand name of Karan Johar.
Karan Johar v. IndiaPride Advisory Pvt. Ltd. & Ors [Commercial IP Suit (L) 17863 of 2024 and Interim Application No. (L) 17865 of 2024]
The Plaintiff Karan Johar, through DSK Legal has filed a Suit before the Hon’ble Bombay High Court against the Defendants, IndiaPride Advisory Pvt. Ltd. (Defendant No. 1), Mr. Sanjay Singh (Defendant No. 2) and Mr. Bablu Singh (Defendant No. 3), inter-alia, seeking a permanent injunction restraining the Defendants from using the name and personality of the Plaintiff in the title of the cinematographic film “Shaadi Ke Director Karan Aur Johar” / “Shaadi Ke Director Karan Johar” (“said Film”), co-produced by Defendant No. 1 and Defendant No. 2 and written and directed by Defendant No. 3. It is pertinent to note that the Plaintiff has no relation with the said Film whatsoever.
The Plaintiff, Karan Johar, is a highly credited and leading Indian director, producer, writer, filmmaker and television personality primarily working in the media and entertainment industry. Further, he is the receipt of several awards and accolades. The Plaintiff has directed and/or produced several blockbuster films. Further, he has been honored with the Padma Shree. The Plaintiff has garnered immense goodwill and reputation in the media and entertainment industry in India and globally.
It is the Plaintiff’s case that given his goodwill and reputation, he is exclusively entitled to commercial exploit his brand name ‘Karan Johar’. It is further the case of the Plaintiff that the title of the said Film as well as the dialogues of the said Film unauthorizedly / unlawfully make a direct and undeniable reference to the Plaintiff’s brand name. In addition, the script of the said Film makes an unauthorized reference to the Plaintiff’s company Dharma Productions Private Limited (well known as ‘Dharma’). In view thereof, the Defendants are violating the Plaintiff’s rights inter alia personality rights, right to publicity and right to privacy, which are, inter-alia protected under law.
The Film was scheduled to be released in theaters / cinemas on June 14, 2024. Trailer of the said Film have been released in the public domain, inter-alia, on the social media platforms YouTube and Instagram, and posters of the said Film are being displayed in public areas in Mumbai. It is the Plaintiff’s case that these trailers and posters have caused and are continuing to cause irreparable loss and damage to the goodwill and reputation of the Plaintiff.
Accordingly, aggrieved by the aforesaid, the Plaintiff moved the Hon’ble Bombay High Court. The captioned matter was listed before Hon’ble Justice R. I. Chagla on June 13, 2024 for hearing of ad-interim / interim reliefs. The Hon’ble Court vide an order dated June 13, 2024 (“Ad-Interim Order”) observed that the Plaintiff has made a prima facie case to protect his personality rights which vest in him, and therefore was pleased to grant ad-interim injunction restraining the Defendants from using the name and personality of the Plaintiff.
Subsequent to the passing of the Ad-Interim Order, the Defendants also took out an application seeking vacation of the Ad-Interim Order. The Hon’ble Court was pleased to hear the arguments of the Plaintiff and the Defendant in relation to the interim reliefs pending the hearing and disposal pf the suit.
By an order dated 7th March, 2025, Hon’ble Bombay High Court allowed the Interim Application filed by the Plaintiff and has allowed the prayers, as sought for (“Interim Order”). The Court inter-alia observed that the Plaintiff has made a strong prima facie case that the Defendants have infringed the Plaintiff’s personality and publicity rights as well as used the brand name of the Plaintiff. Accordingly, the Hon’ble Court was pleased to make absolute the prayer clause (a) to (d) of the Interim Application No. (L) 17865 of 2024 of the Plaintiff, which are as follows:
(a) Pending the hearing and final disposal of this suit, pass an order and direction of temporary injunction restraining the Defendants and their associates/representatives from using the Plaintiff's name or any other attributes of the Plaintiff or reference to the name of Plaintiff "Karan Johar", together or in parts or in any other manner, in the title of the said Film or in the promotion, endorsement and publicity of the said Film, directly or indirectly or in any manner whatsoever, including but not limited to all goods, promotional materials, advertisements, film posters, letterheads, signs, labels and all other things produced by the Defendants, or on behalf of the Defendants, which may be in the possession, custody or control of the Defendants, which are intended to be sold, promoted or otherwise distributed in relation to the said Film;
(b) Pass an order and direction of temporary injunction restraining the Defendants and their associates/representatives, from releasing the said Film on any mode or medium whatsoever including in theatres or running any promotional materials in relation to the said Film on any mode or social media platform, including but not limited to, the said Trailers, until the Defendants remove the name of Plaintiff “Karan Johar”, together or in parts, or his attributes from title of the said Film.
(c) Pending the hearing and final disposal of this suit, Pass order and direction of temporary injunction and their restraining the Defendants associates/representatives, from using the Plaintiff's name or any other attributes of the Plaintiff on the said Website owned and operated by the Defendants or by the Defendants' associates, related entities or any other platform /website where the said Film is promoted and/or publicized directly or indirectly in any manner whatsoever, as well as on other social media platforms including YouTube and Instagram;
(d) Pending the hearing and final disposal of this suit, direct the Defendants to remove the name of the Plaintiff and other attributes of the Plaintiff or any references to the Plaintiff, whether direct or indirect, from the said Trailers and from any other promotional materials including that which is posted on social media platforms, the said Website, hoarding/advertisements at public places, if any, whatsoever;
Further while passing the said Interim Order, the Hon’ble Court has dismissed the Interim Application (L) No.19862 of 2024 of the Defendants. The Hon’ble Court observed that the Defendant’s reliance on the orders of the Single Judge and Division Bench of the Delhi High Court in support of the argument that an injunction may not be granted restraining the release of the film since there exists no “celebrity rights” under law, is misplaced. Further, the Hon’ble Court also took the view that the merely because a CBFC Certificate has been obtained for the said Film, does not restrict the Plaintiff’s right to take action against the said Film for violation of the Plaintiff’s rights. Pertinently, the Hon’ble Court also rejected the Defendant’s proposal to include a disclaimer at the initiation of the said Film by observing that a disclaimer does not protect the personality right and brand name of the Plaintiff.
Senior Counsels represented the matter Senior Counsel Mr. Zal Andhyarujina and Mr Rashmin Khandekar
DSK Legal team represented the matter includes Parag Khandhar, Partner, Chandrima Mitra Partner, Pranita Saboo and Anaheeta Verma
Dharma team includes Rakhee Bajpai, Chief Legal Officer of Dharma Productions.