Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
M.NAGAPRASANNA
Krishna Kannur, S/o. K.R. Ranganath Rao R.R. Kannur – Appellant
Versus
Madhu Prasad, W/o. Dr. Y.R. Ananth Prasad – Respondent
-
ORDER :
The petitioner is before this Court calling in question an order dated 15-03-2025 passed by the XVI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru rejecting an application/I.A.No.II filed by the petitioner under Order VII Rule 10 of the CPC seeking return of the plaint to present it before the Court having jurisdiction on the score that the Court at Bengaluru in which O.S.No.1519 of 2023 is instituted is dehors jurisdiction.
-
2. Heard Sri S. Sammith, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri S. Ramu, learned counsel appearing for the respondent.
3. Facts, in brief, germane are as follows: -
The petitioner is the defendant and respondent the plaintiff. The plaintiff was a Director of M/s PKN Caps & Polymers Private Limited and the defendant, the Company represented by its Chief Executive Officer. On 20-01-2023 one B.Chandrashekar, a former Director sent his resignation through e-mail to the Board of Directors of the defendant/Company. The petitioner, Chief Executive Officer, replies to the e-mail accepting the resignation and reminding Sri B.Chandrashekar about non-compete of certain obligations. The plaintiff replies that she had not signed any non-compete agre
The court determined that in cases of electronic defamation, jurisdiction lies where the wrongful communication is felt, affirming that plaintiffs have a choice to sue where the offense occurred or w....
The jurisdiction for defamation suits is determined by where the alleged defamatory impact occurs, asserting the importance of substantiated claims regarding the distribution and consequences of defa....
Defamation suits can be filed in the jurisdiction where the reputational harm is felt, under Section 19 of the Code of Civil Procedure, without needing leave under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent.
The court ruled that a suit for defamation can be filed in the jurisdiction where the defamatory material is circulated, regardless of where it was published.
The court ruled that without a part cause of action occurring within its jurisdiction, the plaint for defamation could not be maintained, highlighting jurisdictional boundaries as dictated by Section....
Jurisdiction in defamation suits depends on where the cause of action arises, affirming the plaintiff's right to sue in the court of her residence amidst conflicting claims.
Jurisdiction for defamation suits can be established based on location of reputational harm, and applications for return of plaint must consider circumstances as they existed at the time of filing.
Jurisdiction in defamation cases, particularly online, must align with both the location of the wrong and the residence of the defendants, mandating the plaintiff to file in the appropriate jurisdict....
The jurisdiction of a defamation suit depends on where the wrong was committed, and plaintiffs must establish jurisdiction based on actual residency and occurrence of harm.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
