Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV
Sameer Dnyandev Wankhede – Appellant
Versus
Red Chillies Entertainments Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J.
| INDEX | |
| I. | FACTUAL MATRIX |
| II. | SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE PARTIES |
| III. | ANALYSIS |
| A. THE DECISION IN TEJPAL | |
| B. THE RATIONALE UNDERLYING TEJPAL | |
| C. WHETHER TEJPAL IS IN CONFLICT WITH OTHER DECISIONS | |
| D. ANALYSING THE PLAINT | |
| IV. | CONCLUSION |
| V. | ORDER |
1. The strained relationship between free speech and offensive speech is as old as the idea of speech itself. That offensive speech is a form of protected expression under the umbrella of freedom of speech and expression is an oft-quoted proposition. In fact, a school of thought believes that the whole idea of protection of free speech is actually meant to preserve the right to offend, as no protection is needed for other softer forms of expression. However, the right to offend, flowing from the freedom of speech and expression, is often scrutinized on the anvil of the laws regulating speech, such as defamation, hate speech, incitement etc. The present case, factually speaking, also tests the limits of the purported right to offend, couched in artistic freedom, against the plaintiff’s right to reputation. However, as the following discussion would show, it has not been found necessary to step into the comparative merits o
The jurisdiction of a defamation suit depends on where the wrong was committed, and plaintiffs must establish jurisdiction based on actual residency and occurrence of harm.
Jurisdiction in defamation cases, particularly online, must align with both the location of the wrong and the residence of the defendants, mandating the plaintiff to file in the appropriate jurisdict....
Jurisdiction for defamation suits can be established based on location of reputational harm, and applications for return of plaint must consider circumstances as they existed at the time of filing.
The court determined that in cases of electronic defamation, jurisdiction lies where the wrongful communication is felt, affirming that plaintiffs have a choice to sue where the offense occurred or w....
Jurisdiction in defamation suits depends on where the cause of action arises, affirming the plaintiff's right to sue in the court of her residence amidst conflicting claims.
Defamation suits can be filed in the jurisdiction where the reputational harm is felt, under Section 19 of the Code of Civil Procedure, without needing leave under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent.
The jurisdiction for defamation suits is determined by where the alleged defamatory impact occurs, asserting the importance of substantiated claims regarding the distribution and consequences of defa....
The court ruled that without a part cause of action occurring within its jurisdiction, the plaint for defamation could not be maintained, highlighting jurisdictional boundaries as dictated by Section....
The court ruled that a suit for defamation can be filed in the jurisdiction where the defamatory material is circulated, regardless of where it was published.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
