The Madras High Court on Wednesday questioned producer Firoz Nadiadwala on whether Hera Pheri 3 is being made at all, in a copyright case accusing him of violating copyright agreements when he made more than one Hera Pheri film [Seven Arts International Vs Firoz Nadiadwala].

The Court yesterday sought clarity from counsel on whether any more sequels or derivative work in the Hera Pheri franchise was currently underway.

Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy posed the query during the hearing of a copyright infringement suit filed by Seven Arts International Limited, which claims exclusive derivative rights flowing from the Malayalam films Ramji Rao Speaking (1989) and its sequel Mannar Mathai Speaking (1995).

It contends that these films form the original source material from which the Hindi remake Hera Pheri was produced, pursuant to a limited assignment permitting only a single Hindi remake

According to the plaint, while the Nadiadwala was entitled only to remake Ramji Rao Speaking once in Hindi, he went on to produce Phir Hera Pheri (a sequel) in 2006 without authorisation, thereby exceeding the scope of the rights granted.

Seven Arts alleges that the sequel was produced without the consent of the original authors or their assignees and without payment of royalties for derivative exploitation.

Seven Arts further asserts that under an Assignment Agreement dated May 12, 2022, it acquired all derivative rights, including sequel, prequel, spin-off, adaptation and character rights, from the original authors and producer of the Malayalam films. On this basis, Seven Arts claims that any further sequel in the Hera Pheri franchise would amount to copyright infringement unless authorised by it.

The plaint adds that the Seven Arts recently became aware of an intention to produce Hera Pheri 3, including in collaboration with Cape of Good Films, and that shooting was proposed to commence shortly. Citing this apprehension, Seven Arts has sought urgent interim relief to restrain further exploitation of the underlying works.

It was in this context that Justice Ramamoorthy sought clarity on whether Hera Pheri 3 was being made at all. The Court indicated that in the absence of instructions confirming the existence or proposed making of a third instalment, it may be difficult to assess the urgency asserted in the proceedings.

Seven Arts was represented by Advocates Arun C Mohan and Shruthi Srinivasan from Mohan & Associates.

Nadiadwala was represented by Advocates Praveen Desai and Rajavelu