SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(SC) 288

D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, J. B. PARDIWALA, MANOJ MISRA
Bloomberg Television Production Services India Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Zee Entertainment Enterprises Limited – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant(s) : Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Neeraj Kishan Kaul, Sr. Adv. Dr. Menaka Guruswamy, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rohit Kochhar, Adv. Mr. Shiv Sapra, Adv. Mr. Samiron Borkataky, AOR Ms. Ranjeet Rohatgi, Adv. Mr. Rajat Gava, Adv. Mr. Ikshvaaku Marwah, Adv. Mr. Vishal Singh, Adv. Mr. Sanskriti Shrimali, Adv. Mr. Keshav Sehgal, Adv. Mr. Dhruv Sharma, Adv. Mr. Raghav Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Utkarsh Pratap, Adv. Mr. Lavish Bhambhani, Adv. Mr. Harshvardhan Thakur, Adv. Ms. Suvangana Agrawal, Adv.
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Adv. Ms. Madhavi Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Shashwat Singh, Adv. Mr. E.C. Agrawala, AOR

JUDGMENT :

Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, CJI.

1. Leave granted.

2. On 01 March 2024, an ex-parte ad interim order was passed by the ADJ 05 of the South Saket Courts, New Delhi,1[“trial Judge”] directing the appellants (a media platform, one of its editors, and the concerned journalists) to take down an article dated 21 February 2024 published on their online platform within a week. The appellants were also restrained from posting, circulating or publishing the article in respect of the respondent-plaintiff on any online or offline platform till the next date of hearing.

3. The order of the trial Judge indicates that the discussion, after recording the submission of the respondent, commences at paragraph 7. The only reasoning which is found in the order of the trial Judge is in paragraphs 8-9, which read as follows:

    “8. I have noticed that in Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi (Supra), Chandra Kochar (Supra), Swami Ramdev (Supra), ex-parte ad interim injunction was passed, considering that the contents of the material in question was per se defamatory.

    9. In my view, the plaintiff has made out a prima facie case for passing ad interim ex-parte orders of injunction, balance of convenience is also in f

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top