Pal in her plea has claimed that her permission was not sought prior to making of the film and had alleged that it contains defamatory content which would adversely affect her reputation.
She has alleged that as per the film's promos, the lead actress playing her character was shown as an anti-social element, wielding swords and sickles, contrary to her real life persona.
While staying the release of the film - censored or uncensored, the court had rejected the argument of the producers that Pal should not be granted any relief as she came to the court at the last minute despite knowing about the making of the film since March 2013, saying it found no merit in the contention.
The producers' counsel had argued that the intention of Pal from the start was to derail the film's release at the last moment as she took no action, till filing of the case, after sending a cease and desist notice back in June 2013.
He had also offered that a disclaimer can be run at the start of the film that the incidents depicted in it are not in any manner related to Pal, her life or her organisation. The bench, however, had rejected the offer and said "simply saying so will not do".
It had also questioned Pal as to why she moved the court at the "nth hour". "You should have come a month back," the court had said.
