Bombay HC says 'Shaadi Ke Director–Karan Aur Johar' title violates filmmaker’s rights, upholds stay on film

Mumbai: The Bombay High Court on Wednesday upheld the stay on the release of a movie, tentatively titled ‘Shaadi Ke Director Karan Aur Johar’ or ‘Shaadi Ke Director Karan Johar’, saying the name infringes upon filmmaker Karan Johar’s personality and publicity rights.

A bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice M S Karnik said Johar has garnered “immense goodwill and reputation” in the entertainment industry in India and globally.

The court dismissed the appeal filed by one Sanjay Singh, maker of the movie, challenging a March order passed by a single bench of HC granting a stay on the film’s release.

The single bench had passed the order on a plea filed by Johar against the movie and its title.

Johar’s name has obtained a brand value, the court said on Wednesday. 'Karan' and 'Johar', when used together (in a title), point to the celebrity and filmmaker Karan Johar, it said.

HC said since Karan Johar's name has become his brand name, the director has the economic right to commercially exploit the same as per his discretion.

“The name ‘Karan Johar’ is solely associated with the respondent No 1 (Karan Johar) and forms a germane part of his personality and brand name,” the court said in its order.

The high court said that the courts in India have time and again recognised personality rights and publicity rights of public figures, including celebrities.

“The respondent (Johar) being a celebrity is entitled to the protection of his personality and publicity rights and can claim protection against unauthorised commercial exploitation by third parties,” the court said.

The high court also refused to accept the submission of the plaintiff Sanjay Singh that they were willing to add the word “aur” (and) between the names ‘Karan’ and ‘Johar’ in the movie title. In its opinion, the court said, the use of the two names in any combination was sufficient to create confusion in the minds of the public.

“The appellant (Singh) cannot be allowed to exploit the reputation and goodwill of the respondent (Johar) in this manner,” the HC added.