A consumer in Hyderabad booked tickets for a late-night movie at PVR Cinemas. The movie was delayed due to ads. The consumer turned out to be an advocate, and the incident led to a consumer case against them.
The Hyderabad District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has now ruled in favour of the movie-goer. must pay him ₹75,000 total, The Economic Times reported.
The advocate booked two tickets for the 10:35 PM show. He arrived well before the scheduled start time. But advertisements and trailers kept running instead. The movie started 17 minutes after its scheduled time.
This delay pushed his entire night schedule backwards. He finally reached home around 3 AM even though the original plan was to reach home by 2 AM. That extra hour disrupted his remaining night plans.
He argued that it was not a minor inconvenience. Travelling later meant less safety at night. He said had misused time for commercial advertisements. This violated the Information and Broadcasting Ministry’s specific screening rules.
He approached the consumer commission seeking proper compensation. He wanted payment for harassment, inconvenience and legal costs.
PVR did not deny the film’s late start. Instead, it defended its business rights. It cited Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution. This protects businesses’ right to trade freely.
PVR also referenced an earlier Supreme Court ruling. That ruling said that cinemas are private property. Owners can decide their own operational terms. This applies as long as public interest remains protected.
PVR claimed that the pre-film content served a genuine public interest. Topics included literacy, agriculture, women’s welfare and cleanliness drives. It argued that no service deficiency occurred at all.
The commission rejected PVR’s defence. It cited a Ministry memorandum on this matter. Public service films must last only two minutes. They should run within 10 minutes before films start.
The commission also noted PVR’s weak response. It didn’t seriously dispute the delay’s factual details. No solid evidence was presented against the advocate’s claims.
The commission called this an unfair trade practice. Cinemas cannot unfairly extract extra commercial value. Captive audiences shouldn’t be subjected to such prolonged advertising screenings.
PVR was ordered to pay ₹20,000 compensation. An additional ₹5,000 covers litigation costs incurred. Another ₹50,000 was imposed as punitive damages.
This amount will go to the district consumer welfare fund. PVR must also permanently stop this practice, the commission said.
This is not the first time PVR has been dragged to court over similar reasons. A Bengaluru consumer court ruled against PVR Cinemas and in February 2025 over excessive advertisements before a movie.
Complainant Abhishek M.R. lost 25 minutes before watching Sam Bahadur in 2023. Lengthy ads disrupted his plan to return to work, Telangana Today reported.
The court called this an unfair business practice. PVR and Inox were asked to pay ₹20,000 compensation. That covered the inconvenience and mental distress caused.
PVR and Inox were also asked to pay an additional ₹8,000 to cover his legal costs. The court fined both chains ₹1 lakh as well. This amount went to the consumer welfare fund.
BookMyShow, however, was cleared of any wrongdoing since the platform had no control over film schedules.
