Tags
Creditors Approach Madras High Court Against Single Judge Order Allowing Release Of "Dhruva Natchathiram" Movie
Creditors of actor-director Gautham Vasudev Menon have approached the Madras High Court against an order of a single judge paving the way for the release of the much-anticipated Tamil movie "Dhruva Natchathiram". The vacation bench of Justice GR Swaminathan and Justice V Lakshminarayanan has adjour

Creditors of actor-director Gautham Vasudev Menon have approached the Madras High Court against an order of a single judge paving the way for the release of the much-anticipated Tamil movie "Dhruva Natchathiram".
The vacation bench of Justice GR Swaminathan and Justice V Lakshminarayanan has adjourned the case to June 2, after noting that the makers of the movie were planning to release the movie by June 18.
It may be noted that on April 30, 2026, a single judge of the High Court had permitted the release of the movie subject to certain conditions. The court had ordered that an escrow account be created in the name of Kondaduvom Entertainment, a company owned by Menon. The court has directed that all the transactions that are to be done before and after the movie's release be done through the account. An advocate commissioner has also been appointed to oversee the transactions in the account.
The court had passed the orders on the plea filed by two creditors - K Punniyamoorthy and K Premkumar, who sought to restrain the movie's release in light of pending dues. In 2023, the court passed an interim injunction order restraining the release of the movie.
The creditors, K Punniyamoorthy and K Premkumar, had informed the court that they had entered into an agreement with Escape Artists Motion Pictures, one of the producers of Dhruva Natchathiram, for the theatrical distribution of the Tamil movie “Enai Noki Payum Thotta”. However, a financial dispute arose between the parties, and arbitration proceedings were initiated. Eventually, the parties signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) in 2018, through which the proprietor of Escape Artist gave away 50% of his rights in the Dhruva Natchathiram movie to the producers.
When an announcement was made to release the movie in 2023, the creditors approached the court seeking to restrain the release. It was argued that the movie was their security to get back their dues. The court had allowed an interim injunction petition and stalled the release of the movie in 2023.
Since the movie had been stalled for a long time, the court asked the creditors if they would be willing to permit the release of the movie, if the payments were secured. The creditors then agreed for the movie's release, subject to certain conditions. The makers of the movie also agreed to make payments before and after the release of the movie. However, at this point, third party creditors intervened in the matter against the release of the movie.
However, the third party creditors informed the court that they have no objection to the release of the movie, subject to making payments to them. Considering the submissions, and Menon's affidavit informing the court regarding payments that would be made to the creditors before and after the release of the movie, the court ordered the setting up of an escrow account for depositing all amounts. The court added that all payments required to be made after the release of the movie shall be made only from and out of this account. The court had also taken note of the submission made by the movie makers that attempts would be made to release the movie by June 15.
The movie has however now hit another roadblock with the creditors challenging the order of the single judge.
Case Title: K Punniyamoorthy v Escape Artists Motion Pictures and others
Case No: OSA (CAD) 63 of 2026
Continue Reading
Related Articles
Andhra Pradesh High Court: Arbitration Venue vs. Seat Distinction Clarified
The Andhra Pradesh High Court clarifies the critical distinction between 'venue' and 'seat' in arbitration, ruling that mere mention of a place for proceedings does not confer seat status if exclusive jurisdiction is vested elsewhere. This reinforces party intention as paramount in determining supervisory jurisdiction.
Let him stay in jail: Karnataka HC on bail petitioner seen in court premises with liquor bottle
The Karnataka High Court on Thursday declined to consider the bail application of an accused after learning that he was allegedly found carrying a liquor bottle inside the trial court premises [Shivakumara @ Shivu @ Rx Shivu v. State of Karnataka]. A vacation bench of Justice KV Aravind observed th
Protection Of Life Prevails Over Reproductive Choice: J&KL High Court Declines Termination Of 27-Week Pregnancy Of Minor Rape Survivor
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has declined permission for medical termination of a 27-week pregnancy of a minor rape survivor, holding that preservation and protection of life must take precedence where medical experts warn that termination would expose the victim to life-threatening