Back
R. N. MANJULA
Doosan Bobcat India Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Sree Ganesha Rig Service, Rep. by its Proprietor, R. Selvakumar, S/o. Rasappan – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA
PRAYER: Civil Suit filed under Order IV Rule 1 of Original Side Rules read with Order VII Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure, praying for a judgment and decree against the defendant :-
(a) to direct the defendant to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore only) as damages for loss of their reputation in the eye of public due to frivolous and malicious activities against them;
(b) to grant permanent injunction restraining the defendant, their men or dealers or any other person claiming on their behalf from indulge in malicious and reckless allegations made in the public;
(c) to direct the defendant to pay the cost of the suit.
This Civil Suit has been filed by the plaintiff directing the defendant to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,00,000/- [Rupees One Crore only] as damages for the loss of their reputation.
2. Heard the learned counsels for the plaintiff and the defendant and perused the materials available on record.
The case of the plaintiff in brief:-
3. The plaintiff is a company registered under the Indian Companies Act represented through its Assistant Manager; the defendant is the proprietorship concern by name 'Sree Ganesha Rig Service' r
In defamation cases, the burden lies on the plaintiff to prove that the statements made by the defendant were false, malicious, and caused special damages, with the court emphasizing the distinction ....
In a defamation case, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant's statements caused actual harm to their reputation.
Defendant's statements were found defamatory, published maliciously, and lacked justification, leading to damages awarded to Plaintiffs.
A claimant in defamation does not need to prove fame to seek damages; jurisdiction was properly assessed under CPC provisions.
In defamation cases, the burden of proof lies on plaintiffs to establish that defamatory statements were made, while defenses of qualified privilege and fair comment cannot prevail if the statements ....
The plaintiff failed to prove defects in goods supplied under the Reseller Agreement, resulting in dismissal of the suit and a decree for the defendant's counter-claim for unpaid invoices.
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
