Back
MADRAS HIGH COURT
RMT. Teekaa Raman, J.
Edapadi K. Palanisamy – Plaintiff
versus
Dhanapal – Defendant
C.S.No.185 of 2023
Decided on 7.11.2024
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Plaintiff: Mr. S.R. Rajagopal, Senior Counsel for Mr. S.R. Raghunathan
For the Defendant: Ex-parte
IMPORTANT POINT
Defamation – When a man walks, his reputation walk ahead of him—Reputation is integral part of a man.
Headnote:
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 – Order XXXVII Rule 1—Damage suit—Defamatory interview given by defendant—Plaintiff / applicant was former Chief Minister of State of Tamil Nadu who is presently Leader of Opposition for Tamil Nadu State Assembly—Plaintiff alleges that subject interview given by defendant is totally false and aimed to tarnish image of plaintiff while he was contesting for party leadership—Intention of defendant is to bring disrepute to plaintiff and aimed at lowering image of plaintiff in eye of viewers—Contents in video are per se false and motivated by malicious intent—In absence of any explanation on side of defendant to show that there is valid defence in proving statements alleged by him against plaintiff, statements made in eye of public by way of various print and electronic media is nothing but targeted to tarnish image and reputation of plaintiff— Reputation is integral part of a man—Defendant directed to pay sum of Rs.1,10,00,000/- for damages caused to plaintiff. (Paras 15, 16, 20 and 27)
Result: Suit decreed.
JUDGMENT
Suit for damages and for compensatory claim:
The suit has been filed by the plaintiff against the defendant for claiming damages for a sum of Rs.1,10,00,000/- caused to the plaintiff by a defamatory interview given by the defendant on 24.08.2023, 05.09.2023 and 07.09.2023, and for relief of permanent injunction restraining the defendant, his men, agents, servants or persons acting through or under him an on his behalf from in any manner whatsoever releasing, circulating, publishing or giving interviews and post any items, messages on social media containing allegations as found or resembling to one in the document No.1 to 3 filed along with the plaint.
2. The sum and substance of the plaint averment is that the plaintiff / applicant was the former Hon’ble Chief Minister of the State of Tamil Nadu who is presently the Leader of the Opposition for the Tamil Nadu State Assembly; the plaintiff / applicant has been in politics for over four decades and built up an unblemished reputation in public service and he had succinctly contested in several elections and got elected to the State Assembly, five times; the plaintiff is also the General Secretary of his political party, “All Indian Anna Dravida Munnetra Kalagam” (AIADMK).
3. The plaint further proceeds on the basis that:
(i) owing to the hard work and efficient management, under the leadership of the plaintiff, the plaintiff was successfully administering the affairs of the State of Tamil Nadu from the year 2017-2021.
(ii) On 11.07.2022, the General Council of the Party met and elected the plaintiff as their General Secretary and from that date the plaintiff being elected as the A.I.A.D.M.K General Secretary, has been looking after the affairs of the party very successfully.
(iii) The subject matter of the present suit is that according to the plaintiff, a false acquisition has been made by the sole defendant connecting the plaintiff with the incident that had taken place on 23.04.2017 at Kodanadu Estate, Nilgiris District and it is specifically averred that, the same is an attempt to develop ill feeling against the plaintiff amongst the general public and the party cadre, and thus to destabilize the party. Consequently, the plaintiff has been constrained to initiate the present action.
(iv) When the Lok Sabha Election is due around April - May, 2024 in order to spoil the name and credibility of the party as well as that of the plaintiff, some of the persons are indulging in stigmatizing and cause disrepute to the plaintiff and the party. The defendant, at the instigation of rival political parties and clearly with an intention to cause harm to the name and reputation of the plaintiff, has been indulging, in propagating false statements and unverified allegations through the social media and other means, amounting to character assassination of the plaintiff. Despite an order of injunction granted by this Court, which is in force regarding the allegations of involvement of the plaintiff in the incident that had taken place on 23rd April, 2017 at Kodanadu Estate, Nilgiris District and connected matters concious of the same the defendant is making wild accusations / allegations knowing that the same are not true. One such video of an interview given by the defendant, running to 05.07 minutes, uploaded on 06.09.2023 in various social medial platforms.
(v) The plaint proceeds on the basis that on 23rd April, 2017 at mid-night, there was an incident of criminal trespass, murder and robbery that occurred in the property known as “ Kodanadu Estate” at Kothagiri, Nilgiris District. The said Kodanadu Estate was occupied by the former Chief Minister of the State, who happens to be the Leader of the party to which the plaintiff belongs.
(vi) According to the plaint, a FIR has been registered in respect of burglary and murder of security guard and grievous injury caused to another security guard at Kondanadu Estate which happened on the 23rd April 2017. Post investigatio
