Vyas family of bookbinders, headed by Shakuntla Amma, is so fond of watching serial Mahabharat, that they allow neighbor jeweler to use their wall for a hidden safe, so that they may get money to buy a television.
Head of Vyas family Shakuntla Amma takes her family to Haridwar for Mundan (Hair cutting) Ceremony of her grandson Sunder. Her youngest son Bheem finds out that they are descendants of the great sage Ved Vyas.
Bheem decides to include his lineage in his poetry book. He watches and himself suffers exploitation by publisher who prefer publishing works of deceased writers which are in public domain. Meanwhile jeweler Haveliram dies of heart attack.
Jeweler's sons and their wives start fighting for inheritance of ancestral property. Bheem's mentor tells him about the Royalty Act that deprives an inheritor of the rights of a published work after 50 years of a writer's demise.
Bheem makes the lawyer hired by jeweler's son Lakshaman agree to fight for his family's claim on royalty of serial Mahabharat. Shakuntla gets infuriated when she comes to know that family is planning to sell jewelry to arrange court fee.
Members of Vyas family get the thumb impression of sleeping Shakuntla Amma and mortgage their house to arrange the court fee. Their lawyer files suit against makers, sponsors and broadcaster of the serial Mahabharat.
Makers, sponsors and broadcaster of Mahabharat get the summons. Vyas family's lawyer Devarwala rejects all offers of compromise and asks Bheem to arrange his witnesses. Both sides start preparations for the legal fight.
Despite his displeasure against Vyas family for having challenged Copyright Act, publisher Deshmukh agrees to appear in court. However, Pundit of Haridwar Beniprasad puts up improper demands to vouch for the family's lineage.
Dholkiwala, the lawyer representing B.R.T.V, sponsors and Doordarshan, shocks Vyas Parivar and their lawyer Devarmalani by presenting Beniprasad in court as his witness. However surprisingly, Beniprasad confirms ancestry of Vyas family.
Devarwala presents his witnesses to emphasize that people of all professions and backgrounds are legally entitled to benefit from properties made by their ancestors. Then why descendants of a writer are deprived of such benefits?
