Phantom Studios has filed a Rs 250-crore lawsuit in the Bombay High Court against JioStar India, alleging that JioStar’s upcoming film “Queen Forever” is an unauthorised sequel to the 2014 film “Queen” and breaches its co-production agreement. The case, Phantom Studios v. JioStar India & Anr., is scheduled for an urgent hearing before Justice Gauri Godse this week, according to Bar & Bench.
The core allegation: Phantom states that it and JioStar (formerly Viacom18) jointly own all intellectual property and derivative rights related to “Queen” under a 2012 co-production agreement, reaffirmed by a 2022 deed of novation. According to Phantom, any sequel, prequel, remake, or spin-off based on the film’s story, characters, or universe requires consent from both parties, and neither may exploit the franchise independently.
Phantom alleges that JioStar disregarded this arrangement by collaborating with co-producer Trigger Happy Entertainment to develop and film “Queen Forever” without notifying or involving Phantom.
What is Phantom asking the Court to do?
The lawsuit, filed through law firm Rashmikant and Partners, seeks:
- A permanent injunction stopping JioStar India and Trigger Happy Entertainment from making, releasing, or exploiting any sequel, remake, or derivative work based on “Queen” without Phantom’s consent.
- An interim injunction halting all further development, shooting, promotion, and exploitation of “Queen Forever,” also referred to in the suit as “Queen 2.”
- Mandatory disclosure orders requiring JioStar to hand over all agreements and creative material related to “Queen Forever.”
- Formal recognition of Phantom’s 50% share in revenues from any derivative work based on “Queen.”
Why does Phantom refer to this as a sequel instead of an original film? “Queen Forever” is reportedly directed by Vikas Bahl and stars Kangana Ranaut, who also played the lead in the original “Queen.” Phantom cites this creative continuity as evidence that the new project belongs to the same franchise rather than being an independent work.
The plaint further argues that the use of “Queen” in the title, along with the return of the director and lead actor, leverages the goodwill and “cult classic” status of the 2014 film and may mislead audiences and industry stakeholders into believing it is an authorised continuation.
A dispute that has been brewing since 2025: According to the suit, Phantom sent several caution notices and legal letters beginning in 2025, following media reports and interviews with Bahl and Ranaut that referred to work on “Queen 2” and a sequel in development. JioStar has continued to maintain that the project is an original, independent work. Phantom is now challenging that position in court.
Phantom alleges that JioStar breached the novated co-production agreement by excluding it, as a co-owner, from the project. Additionally, Trigger Happy Entertainment is accused of passing off and inducing a breach of…
Source link
Disclaimer
We strive to uphold the highest ethical standards in all of our reporting and coverage. We blogs.grocliq.com want to be transparent with our readers about any potential conflicts of interest that may arise in our work. It’s possible that some of the investors we feature may have connections to other businesses, including competitors or companies we write about. However, we want to assure our readers that this will not have any impact on the integrity or impartiality of our reporting. We are committed to delivering accurate, unbiased news and information to our audience, and we will continue to uphold our ethics and principles in all of our work. Thank you for your trust and support.
Website Upgradation is going on for any glitch kindly connect at [email protected]
