
Bombay HC Refuses to Quash ₹24cr Suit Against Filmmaker Nadiadwala
In a recent development, the Bombay High Court has refused to quash a ₹24-crore commercial suit filed against filmmaker Firoz A Nadiadwala. The suit was filed by businessman Anil Dhanraj Jethani, who had allegedly agreed to fund Nadiadwala’s film production in 2015. Jethani claimed that Nadiadwala had failed to pay him the dues, despite receiving the funds.
Nadiadwala, in his petition, claimed that he had not received any writ of summons, and therefore, the court did not have jurisdiction to hear the case. However, the Bombay High Court rejected his plea, stating that even if the writ of summons was not served, the court could still entertain the suit.
The commercial suit was filed in 2019, after Jethani claimed that Nadiadwala had failed to pay him the agreed-upon amount. Jethani alleged that he had given Nadiadwala a loan of ₹24 crore to produce a film, but Nadiadwala had never repaid the amount.
Nadiadwala, on the other hand, claimed that Jethani had not provided any documentation or proof of the loan. He also argued that the suit was not maintainable, as Jethani had not taken any steps to recover the amount through legal means before filing the suit.
The Bombay High Court, however, rejected Nadiadwala’s arguments, stating that the suit was maintainable and that the court could entertain the case despite the lack of service of the writ of summons. The court also observed that Nadiadwala had not provided any evidence to support his claim that he had not received the writ of summons.
The rejection of Nadiadwala’s petition means that the commercial suit will now proceed, and Jethani will have to prove his claim that Nadiadwala owes him the ₹24 crore. Nadiadwala, on the other hand, will have to defend himself against the allegations made by Jethani.
This development is significant, as it highlights the importance of dealing with financial matters in a transparent and timely manner. Both parties involved in the dispute have a right to seek legal recourse, and it is essential that they adhere to the legal process to resolve the issue.
In recent years, there have been several instances of disputes arising between filmmakers and financiers due to non-payment of dues. These disputes can have a significant impact on the production of films, and can even lead to delays or cancellations.
The Bombay High Court’s decision in this case serves as a reminder to filmmakers to prioritize their financial obligations and to deal with financiers in a transparent and responsible manner. It also highlights the importance of seeking legal advice and guidance when dealing with financial disputes.
In conclusion, the Bombay High Court’s refusal to quash the ₹24-crore commercial suit against Firoz A Nadiadwala is a significant development in the film industry. The case highlights the importance of dealing with financial matters in a responsible and timely manner, and serves as a reminder to filmmakers to prioritize their financial obligations.