RAMENDEA MOHAN DATTA, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal arises from the order dated 14th January, 1976 passed by Sabya-sachi Mukharji, J. allowing amendment of the plaint in a suit for defamation.

( 2 ) THE suit was originally filed in the Court of the 9th Sub-Judge at Alipore in 24 Parganas on or about 4th July 1973 and was marked as Money Suit No. 18 of 1973. An application was made under Clause 13 of the Letters Patent 1865 on behalf of the defendants in the suit, being Matter No. 709 of 1973 of this Court and an order was made therein on 26th January 1974 whereby the suit was directed to be transferred from the Alipore Court to this Court for being tried in its extraordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction. The suit was then marked as Extraordinary Suit No. 12 of 1974 of this Court.

( 3 ) IN August 1975 an application for amendment of the plaint, which is the subject matter of this appeal herein, was filed in which Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. made the said order herein allowing the amendments as prayed for.

( 4 ) THE plaint as originally filed was in Bengali language and character but an unofficial translation thereof was annexed to the petition praying for amendments as indicated in red ink thereon. It is to be noticed that neither the plaint filed in the Bengali language and character nor the writing containing the defamatory statements were placed before the court or annexed to the said petition for amendment or with the plaint sought to be amended.

( 5 ) THE suit relates to certain alleged defamatory statements in writing alleged to have been made by the defendants and/or published by them concerning the plaintiff-respondent No. 1 herein. Surprisingly enough, although serious allegations have been made in the plaint against a particular group of the Vaish-navas, even by transgressing all sense of proportions and decency, yet the plaint singularly lacked in most essential particulars relating to material facts which are required to be pleaded in a suit for defamation, so much so that even the actual defamatory words have not yet been set out or annexed to the draft plaint. From the materials before us it appears that the original plaint contained 35 paragraphs out of which paragraphs 2 to 14 and 16 to 29 were totally sought to be deleted from the body of the plaint and a considerable number of new paragraphs were sought to be introduced by way of amendment. It is not necessary to go into the details of the pleadings which have been deleted except to observe that the same contained language and expression which were quite unbecoming to persons who have taken upon them the sacred duty of preaching religious faith amongst the devotees.

( 6 ) ADMITTEDLY, the plaint contains averments which are not only scandalous but also wholly unnecessary for the purpose of the suit but, as observed hereinbefore, it did not contain even the most vital and material facts without which the plaint would remain defective to such an extent that no court would be in a position to pass any decree thereon. It would be liable to be rejected for want of a complete cause of action.

( 7 ) THE matter, inter alia, relates to a periodical named "sridham NABA-DWIP PATRIKA" in which an article complained of herein was alleged to have been published. The said article is alleged to be containing many false and defamatory remarks in the Bengali language and character whereby the plaintiff and all the members of his group were alleged to have been defamed. Certain leal-lets to the above effect is also alleged to have been published.

( 8 ) MR. A. K. Ranerjee appearing on behalf of the plaintiff-respondent No. J herein, contends that paragraphs 30 and 31 of the plaint, as pleaded and as originally filed, which have since been renumbered as paragraphs 3 and 5 respectively, contained the cause of action in defamation. The learned advocate, however, admits that the said cause of action was pleaded in incomplete form and lacked in material particulars which are now sought to be

Click Here to Read the rest of this document