High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.P. SIVASUBRAMANIAM
M. Jainoon - Appellant
Versus
M. Ammanulla Khan and Others - Respondents
Second Appeal No. 1471 of 1987
Decided On : 04 February 2000
The Judgment was delivered by :
This Second Appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned District Judge, Madurai in A. S. No. 231 of 1984 in reversing the judgment of the learned District Munsif, Ramanathapuram, in O. S. No. 311 of 1980. The defendant in the suit is the appellant in the above Second Appeal.
2. The plaintiffs filed the suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 5, 000/- towards damages arising out of alleged defamation, mental agony and medical expenses. According to them they belong to Muslim community and are members of the Periapatnam Jamath. Jalal Jamal Pallivasal in Periapatnam is under the administration of Jamath. It is under the administration and management of the Jamath. Memebers of Jamath would elect a committee and the present committee consisting of 11 members was functioning from 3-8-1978. Though the committee was unregistered from time immemorial, the committee was administering the Pallivasal and its properties. The first defendant is the Secretary of the Committee. The first plaintiff is a very well to do person at Periapatnam and plaintiffs 2 to 5 are his sons. All of them are well educated and held in high esteem and respect among all the villages of Periapatnam and other surrounding areas. The first plaintiff had arranged for the marriage of his daughter and the marriage ceremony was also fixed to be celebrated on 21-8-1980 at about 9.30 a.m. to 12.00 noon.
Invitations were also distributed to all friends and relatives. The usual customary practice in the village was that the marriage register maintained by Jamath Committee would be brought to the residence or the place where the marriage is being celebrated. The Marriage Register as well as other records of the Pallivasal are always in the custody of Secretary, the defendant. For the said purpose of registering the marriages, charges will be paid and the Secretary was bound to send the register at the time of marriage for due registration. The requisite charges were paid by the first plaintiff for the marriage of his daughter on 15-8-1980 itself and receipt No. 191 had also been issued by the defendant as Secretary. The plaintiffs had requested one Abdul Kafoor Alam Sha who was the President of Ramnad District Jamath and a very respectful person of the Committee and who was invited by all the Muslims in the area for presiding over most of the marriages to conduct his daughter's marriage. But the defendant had suggested that the plaintiffs should invite one Samsudin Lebbai, brother of Abdul Kafoor Alam Sha. The plaintiffs did not agree for the said suggestion. The bridegroom's family had also insisted that only Abdul Kafoor Alam Sha should be invited and later the defendant also agreed to bring the Marriage Register. But contrary to the understanding, on 21-8-1980 when all the parties were waiting for the ceremony, the first defendant did not bring the Marriage Register. Even though many persons were sent out to meet the defendant, he was not to be found and he had absconded and was not at all available in the village. The Marriage Register was also not available even after waiting and search. This resulted in the plaintiffs not being able to perform the marriage within the 'Muhurtham' time and as a result of the non availability of the register, signatures had to be obtained in loose papers. The entire episode resulted in mental shock and agony to the first plaintiff and all the members of his family. Their reputation and the respect which they have commanded were irreparably damaged and they were defamed in the minds of all the friends, relatives and villagers who had gathered for the ceremony. The first plaintiff was very much affected both mentally and physically by the shock and disgrace experienced by him. He was already a heart patient and he was very much affected and hence was required to undergo immediate medical treatment. With the result, a lawyer's notice dated 1-9-1980 was sent to the defendant and a reply dated 22-9-
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.