Eros International Media Limited v. 14 Reels Entertainment Private Limited

In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Reserved on 25.10.2025 Delivered on :

Coram :

The Honourable Mr.Justice N.ANAND VENKATESH Arbitration Application No.1388 of 2025 Eros International Media Ltd.

rep.by its Authorized Representative Mr.Akshay Narayanrao Atkulwar ...Applicant Vs 1.14 Reels Entertainment Pvt. Ltd., Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad 2.14 Reels Plus LLP, Hyderabad, Telangana-500104.

...Respondents

APPLICATION under Section 9(1)(b) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 praying to direct the respondents herein to secure the applicant by depositing an amount of Rs.INR 27,70,97,298/- (Indian National Rupees Twenty Seven Crores Seventy Lakhs Ninety Seven Thousand Two Hundred Ninety Eight Only), which is the outstanding amount liable to be paid by the first respondent to the applicant as per the arbitral wward dated 23.7.2019 before this 1/4

Court.

For Applicant :

Mr.Nithyaesh Natraj for Mr.Vaibhav R.Venkatesh & Mr.Akash Srinanda For R1 :

Mr.M.S.Krishnan, SC for Mr.Keerthikiran Murali & Mr.Ashwin Shanbhag For R2 :

Mr.Vijay Narayan, SC for Mr.P.Giridharan & Mr.Sidharth Rao

ORDER

The main original applications namely O.A.Nos.997 and 998 of 2025 were heard along with Arbitration Application No.1374 of 2025 and orders were reserved on 24.10.2025.

2. This application, which is connected with the main original applications, was listed on the very next day namely 25.10.2025. Therefore, this Court observed that this application would be dealt with along with the main original applications and Arbitration Application No.1374 of 2025.

2/4

3. The main reasoning that was given by this Court while rejecting O.A.Nos.997 and 998 of 2025 and Arb.Appln.No.1374 of 2025 to the effect that the award had become enforceable long back and that the applications could not be moved under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to short-circuit the mechanism provided under Section 36 of the Act will equally apply to the present application also.

4. In the result, the above application is also dismissed. RS 3/4

N.ANAND VENKATESH,J RS 4/4