Back
ALOK MATHUR
Priti Ravindra Shukla – Appellant
Versus
Aparna Soni @ Aparna Thakur – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Alok Mathur, J.
Heard Sri. Jaideep Narain Mathur, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri. Pranjal Krishna, Sri. Abhinava Bhattacharya, Sri. Sajal Yadav, Sri. Utkarsh Vardhan Singh and Ms. Aishvarya Mathur, learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. By means of present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has challenged the order dated 24.04.2024, passed in Civil Suit No. 1286 of 2024 - Priti Ravindra Shukla v. Aparna Soni @ Aparna Thakur and Another, in the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Lucknow wherein the trial Court while entertaining the said suit has issued notices to the defendants therein, but on the other hand has declined to pass any order on the application under Order 39, Rule 1 and 2 Civil Procedure Code(hereinafter referred to as CPC) preferred by the petitioner/plaintiff, seeking to restrain the defendants as well as their agents from publishing any material against the husband of the petitioner thereby defaming him and their family especially considering the fact that husband of the plaintiff is contestant at the General Elections.
3. Brief facts of the present case are that the petitioner is married to one Ravindra Shuk
The right to privacy in matrimonial matters is protected under Article 21, and courts must carefully balance this right against freedom of expression when considering interim injunctions in defamatio....
Interim injunctions in defamation suits must balance free speech and reputation, requiring clear evidence of harm; mere allegations are insufficient for relief.
The court ruled that the right to freedom of speech takes precedence over defamation claims unless a strong prima facie case is established, underscoring the necessity to balance fundamental rights.
The balance between the right to privacy and freedom of expression must be upheld, emphasizing that claims of defamation require full trial for verification.
Injunction – While granting ad-interim injunctions in defamation suits, potential of using prolonged litigation to prevent free speech and public participation must also be kept in mind by courts.
Interim injunctions must meet the triple test: prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable loss; ex-parte orders are justified in defamation cases where urgent protection is needed.
Appellate courts should not interfere with a trial court's discretionary grant of an ex-parte ad interim injunction unless the order is shown to be arbitrary, capricious, or perverse. Procedural defe....
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
