Waiting for a movie to start is part of the cinema experience, but what happens when the wait is stretched by endless advertisements? For one Bengaluru man, this wasn’t just a case of annoyance—it was a violation of his rights.
Frustrated after losing 25 minutes to excessive commercials, he took PVR Cinemas and Inox to court, claiming it caused him “mental agony.”
And the surprising part? Not only did he win, but the Consumer Court ordered the multiplex chain to compensate him with Rs 65,000 for the inconvenience, as reported by the Bar and Bench.
So, what exactly was the case about? What did the court say, and how has PVR responded? Here’s a closer look.
The issue began in 2023 when Abhishek MR, a 30-year-old Bengaluru resident, went to watch Sam Bahadur with two family members at a 4:05 pm show at
PVR-Inox. He had planned his schedule expecting the movie to finish by 6:30 pm, allowing him to return to work.
However, to his surprise, the film didn’t start until 4:30 pm, as the screen was filled with advertisements and movie trailers for nearly 30 minutes.
Frustrated by the delay, Abhishek stated in his complaint that he missed important appointments and suffered losses that “cannot be calculated in terms of money as a compensation.”
He further argued that his “precious time” was wasted and accused the multiplex of engaging in “unfair trade practice” by misrepresenting show timings to “take undue advantage by playing advertisements.”
The consumer court ruled in favour of Abhishek, stating that the excessive pre-movie advertisements constituted an unfair trade practice.
The district consumer court noted, “In the new era, time is considered as money, each one’s time is very precious, no one has right to gain benefit out of others time and money. 25-30 (minutes) is not less to sit idle in the theatre and watch whatever the theatre telecasts.”
It added, “It is very hard for busy people with tight schedule watching unnecessary advertisements. However, they make their own arrangements to get some relaxation with family. (This does) not mean that people have no other work to do.”
Emphasising that “time is considered as money,” the consumer court directed then PVR-Inox to compensate the complainant for the inconvenience caused.
The multiplex chain was ordered to pay Rs 50,000 for engaging in unfair trade practices and wasting the complainant’s time, Rs 5,000 for causing mental agony, and Rs 10,000 to cover the cost of filing the complaint and other related expenses. Additionally, the court imposed a Rs 1 lakh penalty on them for their unfair trade practices.
According to the order dated 15 February, this amount must be deposited into the consumer welfare fund within 30 days.
In response to the complaint, PVR Cinemas and Inox argued that they are legally required to screen certain Public Service Announcements (PSAs) to educate and spread awareness among the public.
Abhishek had recorded the advertisements played before the film as part of his complaint. In their defence, PVR claimed that this act violated anti-piracy laws. However, the consumer court dismissed this argument, stating that he had only recorded the commercials, not the film itself. The court further noted that his actions were justified, as many other moviegoers had faced the same issue, making it a matter of public concern rather than an illegal act.
The court then ruled that the theatre should limit the PSAs to 10 minutes as per the government guidelines and recommended that they be shown before the scheduled start time of the movie or during the interval.
PVR further defended its extended advertisements by stating that they help accommodate latecomers delayed by security checks. However, the commission rejected this claim, calling it “unjust and unfair” to inconvenience punctual viewers for the sake of those arriving late.
With input from agencies
Link to article –
How a Bengaluru man, who went to court against PVR-Inox for wasting his time with ads, won the case
