In a consumer case filed before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission -II, Hyderabad, under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 seeking directions upon PVR Cinemas and PVR Inox Ltd to pay compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- for mental agony and harassment, a Bench of Mr. Vakkanti Narasimha Rao (President) and Ms. Suma Vala (Member) allowed the complaint in part and granted compensation to the complainant.
The complainant purchased two movie tickets on 20-06-2025 for the movie ‘Kubera (Telugu)’, which was scheduled at 10:35 PM. He entered the theatre with his friend and was seated in the allotted seats by 10:30 PM. PVR Cinemas commenced telecasting advertisements and movie trailers from 10:30 PM onwards and continued until 10:52 PM, which caused a delay of approximately 22 minutes. Public service awareness films were telecast thereafter, and the movie began only then. The Complainant had planned to return home by around 2:00 AM but reached home around 3:00 AM, which he claimed caused inconvenience, mental harassment and hardship.
Reliance was placed by the complainant on an Office Memorandum of the Ministry of Information & Broadcasting dated 30-11-2023, which stated that the duration of screening of PSA films was reduced up to 2 minutes and that they shall be screened within 10 minutes before the beginning of the film. He contended that PVR Cinemas, under the management and control of PVR Inox Ltd, wilfully violated that mandate by telecasting commercial advertisements to derive undue commercial benefit. It was argued that this amounted to deficiency of service and unfair trade practice.
The opposite parties denied the material averments, but admitted that the complainant purchased two movie tickets and that the movie was scheduled at 10:35 PM. They contended that the right to exhibit advertisements, PSAs, commercials and movie trailers was within their right to carry on trade and business guaranteed by Article 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution of India. It was argued that no law prohibited the exhibition and that the time utilized for public awareness could not be considered a delay or deficiency of service.
The Commission noted that the opposite parties neither denied nor disputed that the movie did not commence at the scheduled time and that advertisements and trailers continued until 10:52 PM. It was further noted that the said Office Memorandum restricted the duration of screening Public Service Awareness Films up to 2 minutes, but PVR Cinemas had deliberately violated the mandate with the intention to derive undue commercial benefit. Hence, the Commission stated that the negligent actions of the opposite parties amounted to deficiency in service that led to the adoption of unfair trade practice and held them to be liable.
The complaint was allowed in part by the Commission and the opposite parties were directed to jointly and severally pay Rs. 20,000/- as compensation to the complainant for causing inconvenience and Rs. 5,000/- as the costs of litigation. It also directed the opposite parties to discontinue the unfair trade practice under Section 39(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act and not to repeat it. Additionally, the Commission directed them to pay Rs. 50,000/- as punitive damages under Section 39(1)(g) to the District Consumer Welfare Fund Account. 45 days were granted for compliance, and in default the opposite parties were directed to pay interest at 9% p.a. on the compensation from the date of default until realization.
