Thyagaraja Bhagavathar’s Grandson Sues Dulquer Salman’s Kaantha Over Negative Portrayal

Dulquer Salman legal roadblock of Kaantha.

One of the most anticipated period movies, Kaantha, which features and is co-produced by actor Dulquer Salmaan, has hit a major roadblock in the form of legal issues a few days before it is set to release. The grandson of M.K. Thyagaraya Bhagavathar, one of the most sacred personalities of Tamil cinema has sued in order to prevent the film. The suit asserts that the film is a slanderous and untrue presentation of the life of the legendary actor.

B. Thiagarajan, the grandson of the late superstar filed the petition in a civil court in Chennai. The case is brought against the producers of the film including the company of Dulquer Salmaan, Wayfarer Films, and a co-producer, Rana Daggubati, Spirit media. The family seeks a permanent injunction of the court that would prohibit the movie to be released in the cinemas, shown, or offered on the streaming sites.

This legal appeal has come at the very last minute to put a grave dark cloud on the release of the film which was set to be released on November 14. The petition has not been ignored by the court and notices have been given to Dulquer Salmaan and the other producers. They are now ordered to submit their formal response to the accusations before November 18, creating the future of the film itself in some uncertainty.

The scandal came about following the launch of the trailer and promotional content of the movie. The grandson accuses the movie of being directly based on the life of his grandfather though it may be under different names. The family says that this has been done against their consent and with the aim of portraying a falsified and negative image of his story.

Claims of a Defamatory Representations.

The essence of the suit lies in the fact that Kaantha has portrayed M.K. Thyagarajar negatively. The petition confirms that the superstar is presented in the film as a man of loose moral. The family believes that this is false and evil campaign against the personality of a man who had a reputation of a simple and pious life.

In addition, the suit claims that the film misrepresents the last few years of Bhagavathar. The grandson asserts that the film depicts MKT as getting blind, falling into abject poverty and dying as a penniless man in debt. According to this family, this story is entirely false and very disrespectful to his memory.

The family has provided a very different image of the actor in the court petition. They argue that MKT was a poor and pious man who was a philanthropist. They further indicated that he was a teetotaler who never smoked or took alcohol. They state that his life was dignified and he was a man who was financially stable up to the time he died in 1959.

Another area of concern of the family was the description of his health condition. Whereas the movie purportedly portrays that he was blind, the petition of the grandson makes it clear that due to old age, MKT had lost his sight but was not blind. It is based on these particular facts that they argue that the film is a piece of defamation, rather than historical fact.

The History of M.K. Thyagaraja Bhagavathar.

To interpret the furious response of the family it is important to realize the history of MKT or M.K Thyagaraja Bhagavathar. He was not only an actor but he was considered to be the first superstar of Tamil cinema. He was also a Carnatic singer, a highly respected and a gifted one at that and his music ability was a huge factor of attraction to him.

There was no parallel to his popularity in the 1930s and 1940s. His movies were huge movies grossing huge sums of money. His 1944 film Haridas had set a record that lasted decades and made a continuous run in a single theater in Chennai during three consecutive years. 

On screen, MKT was famous as a noble and god-like character and this was reflected in his personal image. He was regarded as a religious and tender person, this is what his grandson, B. Thiagarajan, is attempting to preserve. Legal action against the family is influenced by the need to avoid the further shadowing of this glorified legacy by a gossipy movie.

The lawsuit grounds its argument on the fact that through emphasizing falsehoods and dark periods, the creators of the film, Kaantha are deliberately slandering the name of a man, who is not able to protect himself. They demand that any movie made regarding a public person should be sanctioned by the legal heirs which according to them never occurred.

The Shade of an Ancient Case of murder.

The biggest fear the family appears to have is that the story, Kaantha, is not fictional but a melodramatized biopic about the darkest period of the life of the protagonist, MKT. This chapter is the notorious murder case of Lakshmikanthan of 1944. Lakshmikanthan was a scandalous journalist who used to publish scandalous stories on the personal lives of film stars.

At the very height of his popularity, MKT, when this journalist was killed, was suspected of being a part of the conspiracy. He was arrested and tried together with comedian N.S Krishnan. The case turned into a huge media circus, and regardless of his defense proclaiming innocence, MKT was found guilty and sent to a prison.

MKT had served three years in prison and only after that the Privy Council in London exonerated him. He was found innocent but it was already too late. He lost the prime years of his career, his wealth was lost, and the stigma of the case was still there. The films that came back did not bring the same success that he had previously and he lost his superstardom.

It is this tragic downfall that the family thinks is really the case with “Kaantha. They are afraid that the film will not mention his artistic work and might be dedicated to this scandalous and painful period. According to them, this would create a biased and unfair image of his life that would make a renowned artist just a criminal suspect.

The Veghement Denial of the Filmmakers.

The creators of “Kaantha” have since denied the allegations vehemently in reaction to the increasing controversy. Co-producer Rana Daggubati publicly responded to the suit on Twitter and described the accusations as rather unfounded. He said categorically that the movie bears no actual allusion whatsoever to M.K. Thyagarajah Bhagavathar.