JUDGMENT :

N. Kirubakaran, J.

1. These appeals have been filed against the allowing of applications filed by the respondents/2nd, 5th and 6th defendants to revoke the leave granted in favour of the appellant to file a suit in C.S. No. (Commercial Division) 194/2019 praying for a decree of permanent injunction restraining the respondents/defendants from making any representation that the appellant had made any profit from the sale of share of Hermes other than the consideration as per the share purchase agreement entered into between the appellant and the 3rd defendant on 07.09.2015 and for a mandatory injunction directing the 2nd defendant to withdraw the statements made to the public with respect to the purchase of the shares of Hermes and for damages against the respondents/defendants to pay a sum of INR 40 crores or for any higher amount due to the defamatory and malicious act on their part.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred in the same rank as stated in the suit.

3. The facts of the case are as follows:

The plaintiff filed a suit for injunction and damages against the defendants. The 1st defendant is an Indian Company namely Hermes I Tickets Private Limited initially owned by its promoters namely, Ramasamy and Palaniappan along with minority shareholders of the Company. By virtue of share purchase agreements dated 07.09.2015 and 16.09.2015, the plaintiff sold the shares of the 1st defendant to the 3rd defendant in the year 2015. After purchase of the shares of the 1st defendant Company by the 3rd defendant, the 3rd defendant is said to have sold shares of the 1st defendant company to the 2nd defendant during the year 2015 for a huge value.

4. The plaintiff came to know about the said fact only when the then minority shareholders in the 1st defendant's company issued a legal notice dated 04.04.2017 to the plaintiff during 2017. The minority shareholders claimed that the plaintiff and the 3rd defendant conspired and sold the 1st defendant's company to the 2nd defendant for a higher price and the same was suppressed by the plaintiff. The basis for such a claim was due to a representation made by the 2nd defendant made on 27.10.2015 through a net press release. The reply notice was given on 17.05.2017 by the plaintiff through their counsel which invoked a rejoinder legal notice dated 06.10.2017 from the minority shareholders.

5. Thereafter, the minority shareholders filed a suit for tortious claim before the English Court on 26.01.2018 against the plaintiff. An ex parte worldwide freezing order dated 14.03.2018 was issued against Ramasamy and Palaniappan, who are the promoters of 1st defendant company in the tortious claim made by the minority shareholders. Karur Vysya Bank Limited, the Bankers of the plaintiff company restricted its financial facilities to the plaintiff company and also sought creditworthiness of the plaintiff.

6. In view of the aforesaid position, the plaintiff filed C.S. No. 192/2018 before this Court seeking anti-suit injunction against the minority shareholders from proceeding with the tortious suit filed before English Court. The said suit was rejected in O.S.A. Nos. 275 to 277 of 2018 by judgment dated 24.01.2019 directing the plaintiff/appellant to approach the English Court for appropriate relief and the same was confirmed by the Honourable Supreme Court on 15.02.2019. The present suit is for a mandatory injunction directing the 2nd defendant to withdraw the misleading, malicious and defamatory statements made to the public in respect of the purchase of shares of Hermes and for damages against the respondents/defendants to pay a sum of INR 40 crores or levy any sufficient higher amount for defamatory and malicious act on their part as the 2nd defendant made a publication on 27.10.2015 in its website that it got the 1st defendant company along with other company from the plaintiff/appellant herein and financial investors with capital increase in one of the plaintiff's subsidiary companie