The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-II, Hyderabad, comprising President Sri Vakkanti Narasimha Rao and Member Smt. Suma Vala, directed PVR Cinemas and PVR Inox Ltd. to pay compensation after finding that the continued screening of commercial advertisements and trailers beyond the scheduled show time resulted in a delay of approximately 22 minutes in commencement of the movie “Kubera.”

The Commission held that the continued screening of commercial advertisements and movie trailers beyond the scheduled commencement of the film amounted to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, in view of the restrictions contained in the Ministry of Information & Broadcasting's Office Memorandum dated November 30, 2023

Facts:

The complainant, Chanda Athish Kumar, an advocate residing in Hyderabad, purchased two movie tickets from PVR Cinemas on 20 June 2025 for the Telugu movie “Kubera”, directed by Shekar Kammula. He paid ₹500 for the tickets, and the show was scheduled to commence at 10:35 PM.

The complainant and his friend entered the theatre and occupied their allotted seats at around 10:30 PM. From that time, the theatre started screening advertisements and movie trailers, which led the complainant to believe that the actual movie would begin at the scheduled time of 10:35 PM. However, the advertisements and trailers continued until 10:52 PM, and the feature film commenced only thereafter, causing a delay of approximately 22 minutes.

According to the complainant, the excessive advertisements and trailers were beyond what was permissible under the Office Memorandum issued by the Ministry of Information & Broadcasting on 30 November 2023. He relied on the memorandum stating that approved/public service awareness films could be screened for up to two minutes and were to be shown within the prescribed period before the movie or during the interval.

The complainant further stated that he had planned to reach home at around 2:00 AM, considering the scheduled duration of the movie and the short distance from the theatre to his residence. Due to the delay, he claimed that he reached home at approximately 3:00 AM, causing inconvenience, disruption of his routine and personal commitments, and additional hardship.

On these grounds, the complainant filed a consumer complaint against PVR Cinemas and PVR Inox Ltd. under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice and seeking compensation for the inconvenience and harassment caused to him.

Contentions of the PVR:

PVR Cinemas and PVR Inox Ltd. denied the allegations and sought dismissal of the complaint. They contended that screening advertisements, PSAs and movie trailers was part of their right to carry on business under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution. They further argued that there was no law prohibiting such screenings and that PSAs served a public-awareness purpose. Therefore, the time spent on advertisements and PSAs could not be treated as a delay or deficiency in service.

Observation and Decision:

The Commission observed that it was undisputed that the movie was scheduled to start at 10:35 PM, but advertisements and trailers continued until 10:52 PM, resulting in a delay of approximately 22 minutes. The Opposite Parties also did not substantially dispute this fact or produce documentary evidence to rebut the complainant's evidence.

The Commission considered the Office Memorandum of the Ministry of Information & Broadcasting dated 30 November 2023, which provides that approved/PSA films in cinemas are restricted to up to two minutes and are to be screened within the prescribed period before the movie or during the interval. It held that the screening of commercial advertisements beyond the permissible period amounted to a deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.

Accordingly, the Commission partly allowed the complaint and directed PVR Cinemas and PVR Inox Ltd., jointly and severally, to pay ₹20,000 as compensation for the inconvenience caused by the unfair/restrictive trade practice and ₹5,000 towards litigation costs. The Commission further directed the opposite parties to discontinue such unfair/restrictive trade practices and refrain from repeating them in future, and imposed ₹50,000 as punitive damages, to be deposited with the District Consumer Welfare Fund.

The Opposite Parties were given 45 days to comply, failing which interest at 9% per annum would be payable on the compensation amount from the date of default until realization.

Case Title: Chanda Athish Kumar v. PVR Cinemas & Anr.

Case No.: Consumer Case No. 70/2025

Click Here To Read/Download Order