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

2013 Supreme(Del) 927

S.MURALIDHAR
Nau Nihal Singh Rana – Appellant
Versus
Sunil Kumar – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Plaintiff:A.K. Behra, Gyaneshwar, Advocates.
For the Defendant:Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate.

Judgment

IA No. 442 of 2012 (under Order VII Rule 11CPC)

1. This is an application by the Defendant seeking rejection of the plaint on the ground that the plaint does not give rise to any cause of action.

2. The aforementioned suit has been filed by the Plaintiff claiming damages and compensation in the sum of Rs.25 lakhs along with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of filing of the suit till the date of realisation. According to the Plaintiff, the Defendant is liable to pay him the aforementioned sum as damages and compensation for defamation.

3. The Plaintiff states that he was working as Chief Personnel Officer with Northern Railway from 4th September 1995 to 31st October 1996. The Plaintiff states that he had filed a civil suit in this Court in January 2001 against the Ministry of Railways for grant of compensation of Rs.10 lakhs for defamation in connection with a press communique dated 4th November 1996 issued by the Ministry of Railways. When the suit was transferred to the Court of the learned Additional District Judge (‘ADJ’) on account of revision of pecuniary jurisdiction, it was re-numbered as CS No. 83 of 2009. The said suit was dismissed on 26th July 2010 on the




























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