A Hyderabad consumer commission has ordered PVR Cinemas and PVR Inox Ltd to pay ₹75,000 in all after holding that a 22-minute delay in the start of a film due to advertisements and trailers was a deficiency in service and an unfair trade practice.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
Hyderabad: The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-II, Hyderabad has held PVR Cinemas and PVR Inox Ltd liable for screening commercial advertisements beyond the permissible period before a film, directing them to pay ₹20,000 as compensation for inconvenience, ₹5,000 as litigation costs and ₹50,000 as punitive damages [Chanda Athish Kumar v. PVR Cinemas and Another].
The Commission, comprising President Vakkanti Narasimha Rao and Member Suma Vala, decided Consumer Case No. 70 of 2025.
The complaint
The complainant, advocate Chanda Athish Kumar, said that on June 20, 2025 he bought two tickets at ₹500 for the Telugu film Kubera, with the show scheduled for 10:35 PM. He entered the theatre at around 10:30 PM and found that advertisements and trailers continued until 10:52 PM, so the film began 22 minutes after the scheduled time. He contended that this violated the guidelines of the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, which permit only two-minute public service announcements within the prescribed periods.
The Commission’s finding
Relying on the Office Memorandum of November 30, 2023, the Commission held:
“screening of commercial advertisements beyond the permissible period amounted to a deficiency in service and unfair trade practice”
The directions
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 and ₹5,000 towards litigation costs to the complainant, and ₹50,000 as punitive damages to the District Consumer Welfare Fund. It also directed them to discontinue the unfair trade practice and not to repeat it. The amounts are to be paid within 45 days, failing which they will carry interest at 9% per annum.
ALSO READ: Karnataka High Court Stays Order Against PVR Cinemas Over Extended Advertisements
Why The PVR Inox Order Matters
The order adds to a line of consumer rulings on advertisements shown before films after the scheduled start time, treating a prolonged commercial-advertisement block as a deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. The punitive component payable to the Consumer Welfare Fund shows that commissions may go beyond individual compensation to deter repetition. The order is that of a district commission and is open to challenge before the appellate forum.
Case Title: Chanda Athish Kumar v. PVR Cinemas and Another [Consumer Case No. 70 of 2025]
Bench: President Vakkanti Narasimha Rao and Member Suma Vala, District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-II, Hyderabad
Date of Order: September 11, 2026