June 4, 2021 - An amended consolidated complaint was filed.

April 20, 2021 - The court granted in part and denied in part the defendants' motion to dismiss.

August 28, 2020 - A motion to dismiss the consolidated complaint was filed.

July 1, 2020 - A consolidated complaint was filed.

June 21, 2019 - An investor in shares of Eros International Plc (NYSE: EROS) filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey over alleged violations of Federal Securities Laws by Eros International Plc in connection with certain allegedly false and misleading statements made between July 28, 2017 and June 5, 2019.

On June 5, 2019, CARE Ratings, India’s second largest credit ratings agency, downgraded Eros’s Indian subsidiary’s credit rating to “Default,” citing concerns regarding “ongoing delays/default in debt servicing due to slowdown in collection from debtors.” The next day, an article was published entitled “Eros International: On-The-Ground Research, Employee Interviews, and Private Company Documents Expose Egregious Accounting Irregularities,” purported to explain the reason for the downgrade. The article alleged, among other things, that “a significant portion of Eros’s receivables don’t exist” and that they have documented “multiple undisclosed related-party transactions that appear designed to hide receivables.” Shares of Eros International Plc (NYSE: EROS) declined from $10.68 per share in March 2019 to as low as $2.60 per share on June 14, 2019.

According to the complaint the plaintiff alleges on behalf of purchasers of Eros International Plc (NYSE: EROS) common shares between July 28, 2017 and June 5, 2019, that the defendants violated Federal Securities Laws.

More specifically, the plaintiff claims that between July 28, 2017 and June 5, 2019, the defendants Period made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that Eros and its executives engaged in a scheme to use related-party transactions to fabricate receivables that they reported in Eros’s public financial disclosures, that because of this scheme, Eros’s financial position was weaker than what the Company disclosed, that consequently, the Company’s Indian subsidiary, Eros International Media Ltd, missed loan payments and had its credit downgraded, and that due to the foregoing, defendants’ statements about Eros’s receivables, business, operations, and prospects, were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages.