Hera Pheri 3 controversy: Copyright case against Firoz Nadiadwala

New Delhi. There has been suspense for a long time regarding Akshay Kumar, Sunil Shetty and Paresh Rawal’s upcoming film Hera Pheri 3. Earlier there were reports that Paresh Rawal left the film due to differences with Akshay Kumar, however later a settlement was reached between the two. Paresh Rawal’s comeback in the film raised hopes among the fans that the shooting of Hera Pheri 3 will start soon, but now once again the problems of the film seem to be increasing. South producer has staked his claim on the rights of Firoz Nadiadwala’s film.

During the hearing in Madras High Court, producer Firoz Nadiadwala was directly asked whether ‘Hera Pheri 3’ was actually being made or not. This question arose after a petition by a production company Seven Arts International, which has claimed that the copyright of ‘Hera Pheri’ franchise is with them and not with Firoz Nadiadwala.

Hera Pheri 3 stuck in legal trouble

GP Vijayakumar, managing director of Seven Arts International, told Hindustan Times that ‘Hera Pheri’, released in 2000, was actually a Hindi remake of the Malayalam film ‘Ramji Rao Speaking’ (1989), which Firoz Nadiadwala was given permission to make. He was allowed to make only one film. According to the company, this permission neither included the right to make a sequel nor the permission to use the characters further.

Firoz Nadiadwala had bought only the rights of the first film

Despite this, Nadiadwala made ‘Phir Hera Pheri’ in 2006 and has now reportedly sold the rights of the third part to actor Akshay Kumar’s production house. The controversy regarding this continued to deepen. GP Vijayakumar, Managing Director of Seven Arts International, claims that he had legally purchased the entire rights of the franchise from Aditya Films, the original producer of ‘Ramji Rao Speaking’ in 2022.

According to Vijayakumar, initially no action was taken on this matter because the first film was directed by Priyadarshan and he had personal relations with him. At the time of the second film, the copyright holder could not get information about the entire matter. Later, when the rights were investigated, alleged violations and fraud came to light.