Madras High Court Stays Single Judge Order Asking Actor Vishal To Pay ₹30 Crore To Lyca Productions

The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice Mohammed Shaffiq granted the interim relief in an appeal moved by the actor challenging the June 2025 order of the single judge.

The judges however asked the actor to deposit 10 crore towards the credit of the case and directed the registry to deposit the money into an interest-bearing account.

Background

Vishal had taken a loan from GN Anbu Chezhian of Gopuram Films to the tune of Rs 21.29 crore along with interest. When these amounts remained unpaid, Lyca Productions stepped in and paid Anbu Chezhian on the promise that Vishal will repay Lyca the entire amount along with interest at the rate of 30% per annum, calculated on diminishing balance.

When this amount remained unpaid, Lyca approached the High Court which directed him to make a fixed deposit for ₹15 crore to the credit of the civil suit and hand over the original FD receipts to the Registrar of the High Court. This FD was initially for a period of one year and was to be renewed till the disposal of the suit. Though Vishal had challenged this order, the court had observed that there was a debt and Vishal was liable to repay Lyca.

The court noted that there was an agreement entered into between the parties which was admitted by Vishal in his counters and the same was breached. Thus, the court noted that Lyca was entitled to recover the principal amount of from Vishal. The single judge had also remarked that Vishal's conduct had been evasive from the beginning of the suit.

When the appeal against this order was taken up today, Senior Advocate AK Sriram, appearing for the actor, informed the bench that the Actor was not in a financial position to pay off the exorbitant interest claimed by the film company. He also submitted that the interest payable by the actor alone was close to Rs. 40 crore.

At this point, the court wondered if film financiers could claim such exorbitant interest. The court remarked that it had to be seen whether such a demand for exorbitant interest would be against the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Charging Exorbitant Interest Act 2003.

The court directed Lyca to file its counter and adjourned the case by four weeks.

Case Title: Vishal Krishna Reddy v. Lyca Productions

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 437

Case No: OSA (CAD) 121 of 2025