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

1940 Supreme(Mad) 217

VENKATARAMANA RAO
Srimat Paruvastu Pattabhirama China Govindacharyulu – Appellant
Versus
Punyamurthula Seshagiri Rao – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Venkataramana Rao, J.

1. This second appeal arises out of an action for damages for libel filed by the plaintiff against the defendant in respect of certain allegations made by the latter in writing to the Superintendent of Post Offices concerning an appointment to the branch post office at Vedapalli. This was in December, 1932. On the 8th February, 1933, the plaintiff sent a notice to the defendant requiring him to tender an unconditional apology within fifteen days of the date of receipt of this notice and threatening a civil or criminal action in case he failed to do so. On the 26th February, 1933, the defendant sent a reply stating that the allegations made by him in his petition were not false, that he never intended to harm his reputation and that he was sorry that the allegations which he had made should have given rise to any misapprehension in regard to his intention. Of course this was not an unconditional apology as required by the plaintiff. Thereupon the plaintiff filed a criminal complaint. The defendant justified his action and the criminal complaint was dismissed. A revision petition was preferred against the said order and after a lengthy argument addressed




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