In the High Court of Bombay at Goa
THE HONOURABLE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SWATANTER KUMAR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.A. BRITTO
Umar Abid Khan & Others
Versus
Vincy Gonsalves alias, Vincent Gonsalves & Others
First Appeal No.192 of 2004
Decided on : 03-11-2009
Libel - Meaning thereof - Held - It is publication of false and defamatory statement tending to injure the reputation of another person without lawful justification or excuse - For actionable claim, statement must be expressed in some permanent form.
Swatanter Kumar, C.J.
Marathi daily “Gomantak” in its Issue dated 17th May, 1996 published following news item –
“THREAT TO HURL BOMB ON THE HOUSE WITH THE AID OF DAWOOD IBRAHIM COMPLAINT OF GONSALVES OF VALPOI
Liyakat Ali Khan resident of Valpoi and presently working in Dubai threatened that bomb will be hurled on the house of Vincy Gonsalves of Valpoi with the help of goon of Dubai Dawood Ibrahim.
Shri Gonsalves recently lodged the complaint at Valpoi Police Station and also filed written complaint before Chief Minister, Shri Pratapsingh Rane and Central Bureau Investigation (Bombay). There is also news that C.B.I. Asked for investigation report from Valpoi Police.
Shri Gonsalves said in his complaint that in the year 1977, he purchased 1500 sq. mts. Of land surveyed under No.64/1. In 1985 he built house utilising half of the area of purchased land and in 1991, the remaining half of the area one Umar Abid Khan of Valpoi built his own house illegally. Several time Shri Gonsalves brought to the notice of Municipality of Valpoi and Mamlatdar, Shri Dalvi about the illegal construction being carried out by Khan by using financial, political and mascular powers. Once or twice Municipality stopped the work but with the support of some Municipality Councillor Khan completed the work of the house. Now Khan has requested Chief Officer Manohar vast of Valpoi Municipality to register the said house by issuing house number.
But Shri Gonsalves has strongly objected for this. Liyakat Khan brother of Umar Khan working in Dubai has recently visited Goa, Shri Gonsalves said in his complaint while returning to Dubai he threatened Shri Gonsalves that he will hurl bomb on his house with the help of Dawood Ibrahim. He further said in his complaint that his family receiving threatening phone calls from Dubai.
In the meanwhile, upon failure on the part of Valpoi Police Station to take proper steps in the matter, he lodged complaint before Inspector General of Police Shri Brar.
Complaint has turned into a subject of discussion in the Valpoi locality and several topsy survey counteracting/comments are taking place amongst the police regarding the relation of Liyakat Khan with Dawood the enemy of the Country.”
2. Plaintiff No.1 felt that the news item caused immense defamation of himself, his brother Liyakat Ali and members of their family (who later on were joined as Co-Plaintiffs). The Plaintiffs felt that the publication in widely circulated news paper lowered down their moral and intellectual character besides lowering, their credit in their circle, relations among kith and kin and in society at large. The Plaintiffs, therefore, filed Special Civil Suit No.34 of 1996/A before the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Bicholim, Goa, for seeking following damages.
1. Loss of reputation, image, status, stature and credit worthiness in the local, neighbouring States and in the Gulf countries, inclusive of Dubai. Rs.1,00 crores
2. Mental agony, tension, torture, humiliation and sufferings to the Plaintiff, his brother and other family members; Rs. 25,00 lakhs
3. Loss of career prospects of the Plaintiff, his brother Mr. Liyakat Ali Khan, their children, namely
i) Master Sikander Khan, son
ii) Miss Shaeen Khan, daughter
iii) Miss Zeba Khan, daughter of Mr. Liyakat Ali Khan. Rs. 25,00 lakhs
Rs.1,50 crores
(Rupees One Crore and Fifty Lakhs Only)
3. Defendant No.1 Vincy Gonsalves, disputed the suit claim by filing written statement at Exh.4. Defendant No.1 who denied knowledge about the news item, however, has contended that the language of the news item contains some true statement and cannot be characterized as absolutely false. According to defendant No.1 the facts stated in the news item were known to public much earlier to 31st March, 1996 and the news item dated 17th May, 1996 has given real picture of vindictive nature of Plaintiff. It is the specific defence of Defendant No.1 that the comments in the news item are based on real, true a
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.