IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Prathiba M. Singh, J.
PATANJALI AYURVED LIMITED & ANR - Appellant
Vs.
GOOGLE LLC AND OTHERS - Respondent
Civil Suit (Os) No. 104 of 2019; Interlocutory Application No. 2577 of 2019
Decided On : 26-02-2019
Defamation - Suit for permanent injunction and damages - Defamatory - Disparaging statement - Video is violative of the above guidelines which Google and You Tube have prescribed for themselves - Video is also not just offensive against the Plaintiffs but could border on threats constituting violations of law - Defendants No.1 and 2 have rightly removed the video from their platforms - Facebook Inc. is also directed to ensure that the links to this video does not be available on its platform.
Prathiba M. Singh, J.
The Plaintiffs - Patanjali Ayurved Limited and Swami Ramdev through his Power of Attorney holder have approached this Court by filing the present suit for permanent and mandatory injunction and damages. The Defendants in the suit are Google LLC (Defendant No.1), YouTube Inc. (Defendant No.2), Facebook, Ireland (Defendant No.3) and unknown Defendants.
2. The case of Plaintiff No.1 is that it manufactures and sells various herbal nature-based products and herbal medicines under the trademark 'Patanjali'. Plaintiff No.1 claims to be one of the fastest growing FMCG companies in India. It is the case of the Plaintiffs that the various home care products, cosmetics, food and beverages and health drinks sold under the mark 'Patanjali' have acquired enormous goodwill and reputation and the annual turnover of the Plaintiff No. 1 company is approximately Rs.9,000 crores. Plaintiff No.2, who is the brand ambassador of Plaintiff No.1 company being a proponent of various fields such as Yoga and Ayurveda, also claims to enjoy enormous goodwill.
3. It is the case of the Plaintiffs that they came across a video uploaded by some unknown person who made several defamatory, disparaging and threatening statements against the Plaintiffs. In view of the allegations, defamatory statements and threats contained in the video, the Plaintiffs called upon YouTube, to remove the same. It was also found that links to the YouTube video were available on Facebook's platform. Notices were issued by the Plaintiffs for removal of the video. The Plaintiffs' complaints were not entertained and hence the Plaintiffs approached this Court by means of the present suit. The reliefs prayed in the plaint are as under:
"i. Pass a decree of permanent injunction in favour of the Plaintiffs and against the Defendants whereby directing the Defendants to permanently take down, remove and/ or block/restrict access to the video/URL/weblink mentioned in the list of documents attached with the present Plaint and/or any other active Videos/URLs/weblinks which contain or purport to contain, the defamatory Video/URL/Weblink or part thereof posted on their respective websites and/or also from all media across the globe in the control of the Defendants, including but not limited to the websites, mobile application, etc;
ii. Pass a decree of mandatory injunction in favor of the Plaintiffs restraining the Defendants, its agents, officers, assigns, representatives from thereby directing the Defendants to forthwith block/remove the impugned video/ weblink/URL from their websites, webpages, mobile application, etc. across the globe;
iii. Pass a decree of permanent and mandatory injunction in favor of the Plaintiffs and against the Defendants thereby directing the Defendants to block/remove the impugned Videos from its websites/portals across the globe on receipt of any complaint in future from the Plaintiff in regard to the videos/URLs/Weblinks containing same and/or similar subject-matter; and also from all media in the control of the Defendants, including but not limited to their websites, mobile applications, another platforms;
iv. Pass a decree of Permanent Prohibitory Injunction in favor of the Plaintiffs and against the Defendants for restraining the Defendants or other news agencies from reporting any news with respect to the impugned videos or its content thereof;
v. Pass a decree of damages to the tune of Rs. 2,01,00,000/- in favour of the Plaintiffs and jointly and severally against the Defendants;
vi. for costs of this suit; and
vii. Any other and further reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper to meet the ends of justice."
4. On 19th February, 2019, summons and notices were issued to the Defendants. The Defendants entered appearance on 21st February, 2019. It was submitted by Ld. Senior Counsels appearing for the Defendants that they would remove the offending video on the URLs/links mentioned at page 19 of the plaint only for the India domain
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.