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

2001 Supreme(Del) 1619

High Court Of Delhi
PUNJABI BAGH CO OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LIMITED - Appellant
Versus
K.L.KISHWAR - Respondent
Interim Application 3298 of 1995
Decided On : 11/09/2001

Advocates Appeared:
DIVAN NAUBAT RAI, K.K.BUCHAR

Headnote:Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Order 7 Rule 11 — Rejection of plaints — Suit for damages as defamation filed — Plaintiffs and defendants are members of a co-operative society — Plaintiff are office bearers — Allegation leveled against plaintiffs in many cases filed by the defendants — Plaintiff filed the present suit for damages on account of the allegations against themselves — Defendants filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 for rejection of plaint — If statements were made only to the authorities having lawful authority over that person with respect to the subject of accusation, they dont constitute defamation — Office bearers and authorities having control over the society were obliged to entertain complaints and look into them — There is no personal allegations against the plaintiffs — Application under Order 7 Rule 11 is allowed — Suit dismissed.

       Held:

       I think the alleged defamatory statements made by the defendants in their various communications/petitions to the plaintiffs or to the Joint Registrar or other authorities having control over the aforesaid Society fall in the category of privileged communications and no action for defamation will be maintainable. The defendants who were members of the Society had the right and duty to complain to the office bearers of the society and concerned authorities under the law against the mismanagement of affairs/funds of the Society and vice-a-versa, the office bearers and authorities having control over the Society were obliged/entitled to entertain such complaints and look into them. The reciprocity of interest/obligation is thus manifest. Obvious conclusion, thereforee, is that allegation/statement contained in such communications, petitions/complaints are privileged. They can not be made the basis of an action for damages for defamation. This suit, thereforee, is not maintainable, under the law.

O. P. Dwivedi

( 1 ). This order shall govern the disposal of IA. No. 3298/95, under Order 7 Rule 11 Code of Civil Procedure, filed by the defendant No. 2 seeking rejection of the plaint under Order 7 rule 11 (d) Code of Civil Procedure on the ground that suit is not maintainable.

( 2 ). Briefly stated, the facts leading to this application are that the plaintiffs above named filed this suit for Rs. 10 Lacs as damages for defamation. Plaintiff no. 1 is a society registered under the Cooperative Societies Act, plaintiff No. 2 is the President, plaintiff No. 3 is the Vice-President, plaintiff No. 4 is Honorary secretary and the plaintiff No. 5 is the Treasurer of the plaintiff No. 1 society. The society was formed for settling the refugees who had migrated to India on partition of the country. The land was acquired in the name of the society, plots were carved out and allotted to the members of the society. The defendants were also members of the plaintiffs society. It is alleged that because of some acts of omissions and commissions on the part of the defendants, they were suspended from the membership of the society in accordance with Bylaws after following prescribed procedure and also observing the principles of natural justice. Thereupon, the defendants started defaming the plaintiffs by publication of defamatory remarks. It is pleaded that plaintiff Nos. 2 to 5 were duly elected in the last election which was held on 26/04/1992. Some members who had contested the elections and were not declared elected, became inimical to the plaintiffs and such members along with the defendants filed false/frivolous cases against the plaintiff no. 1 society impleading plaintiff Nos. 2 to 5 as the defendants. Particulars of the petitions which were filed by the defendants are give as under :-

1. JR/11/9/hb/92-93/556 entitled Kishori Lal Kishwar v. Refugee cooperative Housing Society Ltd. under Section 60 of the Delhi cooperative Societies Act. 2. Petition No. 21 entitled as Kishori Lal Kishwar v. Refugee Cooperative housing Society Ltd. under Section 32 of the Delhi Cooperative societies Act. 3. Petition No. 22 entitled as Kishori Lal Kishwar v. Refugee Cooperative housing Society Ltd. under Section 32 of the Delhi Cooperative societies Act. 4. Transfer petition filed before Sh. S. R. Sharma, Financial Commissioner delhi, seeking transfer of the above petition from the Court of the registrar Cooperative Societies Delhi to some other Court.

( 3 ). It is alleged that in all these petitions the defendants have made false, baseless and wild allegations against the plaintiff No. 1 as well as against the plaintiff nos. 2 to 5 which has caused mental pain; agony to the plaintiffs and have defamed/lowered their prestige and reputation in the eyes of the members of the society. In para 9 of the plaint one more instance of such publication of lible is given. It is alleged that in one case bearing Arbitration Case No. 9/92 pending before the Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Delhi, the defendants had made the following defamatory allegations against the plaintiffs :-

"in para II it is pointed out that members of the Managing Committee have made an invidious and clandestine and mischievous attempt to get the sanction of huge amounts in order that members of the Managing committee promote selfish interests of their proteges and darlings and carve out an area of corruption to cater to their unholy loot OF OUR funds at the expense of the Society. . . . "

( 4 ). Besides, the defendants are alleged to have made same defamatory statements in various communications, the details of which are as under:

(I ). Defendant No. 2 in his communication dated 12. 12. 1992 has averred; "the debris confirms the dishonest intentions and perfidious motives and also proves conclusively that respondents have joined hands in the co-operative loot of funds of the Society". A copy of the said letter issued by defendant No. 2 is filed herewith as Annexure c . (ii ). In his co






















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 Back to top