Yuvraj Singh, a former cricket player for India, has sent two separate legal notices, citing arbitration clauses, to two real estate companies in Delhi. The notices are about claims that Singh’s privacy rights have been violated when building projects are promoted, and he has not received his apartment in the capital’s possession on time. A legal notice was sent on behalf of the cricket player by Rizwan Law Associates, a law firm based in Delhi. The notification asked for “adequate damages in terms of delay caused in completion of the project and issuance of the Letter of Possession in the absence of any reasonable cause or extension in the timeline.”
It has additionally requested “delivery of the proper quality, standard, class, and grade of the apartment to my client, who was promised a premium quality apartment and has been offered an extremely inferior quality apartment.”
As to the notification, the cricket player reserved a flat in 2020 at Hauz Khas, New Delhi, within a real estate company’s project.
One legal notice referring to the delayed possession of the dwelling units names M/s Brilliant Etoile Private Limited and M/s Uppal Housing Private Limited as notices. Concerning a violation of his right to privacy, the cricket player’s second warning was sent only to Brilliant Etoile Private Limited.
“That this dispute mostly relates to the misuse of the celebrity’s brand value and infringement of intellectual property rights related to personality rights, in violation of the terms of the Memorandum of Understanding dated November 24, 2020, although My Client retains the right to include more specific examples and further details in the Statement of Claim,” the second notice stated.
The cricket player was required by the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) to support and advocate for the project; the MoU ran out on November 23, 2023. According to the notice, he is upset that his services are allegedly still being used for profit and that his photos are being used on billboards, project sites, social media posts, and articles even after the MoU has expired.
The former all-rounder for India claimed that the purported ongoing use of his and others’ images violated his IP rights, which are protected by legislation and include his copyright, personality rights, and right to publicity
