Representative image showing a PVR movie theatre.
Credit: Reuters Photo
A Bengaluru man, who had filed a consumer case against PVR and INOX (which is merged with PVR now) for "wasting his time" by showing long ads before the movie, has won the case.
As per a report by Bar and Bench, Abhishek M R sued the PVR Cinemas, BookMyShow and INOX for showing long ads of about 25 minutes before the movie began, which wasted his time.
He had filed the case in 2023 when he went to watch Sam Bahadur.
A consumer court now has ordered PVR to mention the exact time of the movie in the tickets and not the time when the commercials ads begin.
According to the complainant, the long ads delayed the movie time and due to which he could not get back to work, as per his plan.
The district consumer forum observed that PVR and INOX cannot "engage in unfair practice and waste movie goer's time by showing long commercial ads during the time slot meant to exhibit the movie itself."
The forum however said that BookMyShow need not be held in this case as they are not the ones in charge of movie show time or telecast of advertisements.
The court further said that "time is money" and no one has the right to benefit from someone else's time and money.
"Spending 25 to 30 minutes watching advertisements is a significant waste of time, especially for individuals with tight schedules. People seek entertainment for relaxation, but that does not mean they have no other responsibilities," the court observed.
After this case, now the court has asked PVR and INOX to "mention the actual movie time on the tickets", "stop engaging in unfair trade practices" and not show any ads beyond the set time.
The court has asked to pay Rs 20,000 to complainant Abhishek for "causing mental agony", Rs 8,000 for the expenses he had to pay for filing the complaint, Rs 1 lakh for "punitive damages for engaging in unfair practices".
PVR INOX defended its practice by citing government regulations that require the screening of public service announcements (PSAs) before movies.
However, the court noted that these guidelines limit such screenings to a maximum of 10 minutes.
The complainant had recorded the advertisements as evidence, prompting PVR INOX to argue that this violated anti-piracy laws.
The court dismissed this claim, clarifying that only the advertisements, not the film itself, were recorded, and this was done to highlight an issue affecting many moviegoers.
(With PTI inputs)