Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Del) 47110
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, J
MR. KAMALJEET SINGH GULATI VS. MS. RAMINDER DUA & ORS.
CS(OS) 933/2025|I.A. 31960/2025|I.A. 31961/2025|I.A. 31959/2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Arun Sri Kumar, Sowjhanya Shankaran, Siddharth Satija, Akash Sachan, Anuka Bachawat, Charu Sinha
For the Respondents: Piyush Beriwal, Debasish Mishra, Ruchita Srivastava, Neha
In a defamation suit, the court may observe that government authorities should not be influenced solely by allegedly defamatory communications while an application for an interim injunction is pending adjudication.
Headnote:The plaintiff, an OCI card holder and former consultant for the second defendant, filed a suit for damages and injunction alleging defamation. It is contended that the first defendant, a terminated employee of the second defendant, engaged in a sustained campaign of malicious complaints via email, WhatsApp, LinkedIn, and fake profiles. The court registered the plaint and issued summons to the first defendant. The primary issue concerns the request for an interim injunction to prevent further defamatory communications and the potential adverse influence on government authorities. The court observed that since it has taken cognizance of the application, government or departmental authorities should not be solely influenced by the communications unless they find substance therein. The application for exemption was allowed, the suit was registered, and the prayer for an interim order was deferred to the next date of hearing.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. issuance of notice for the interim injunction application. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. court's observation on the influence of defamatory communications on government authorities. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. scheduling of the hearing for the interim order. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. procedural directions for registration of suit, issuance of summons, and filing of pleadings. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
O R D E R
I.A. 31961/2025 (exemption)
1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions.
2. Application stands disposed of.
CS(OS) 933/2025
1. The plaintiff, a British citizen and OCI card holder, has filed this suit seeking damages and injunction for the alleged defamation from the purported sustained and malicious complaints allegedly made by defendant No.1. Defendant No.1 seems to have been a terminated employee of defendant No.2.
2. The plaintiff was a consultant at defendant No.2 at the relevant point of time.
3. The attention of the Court has been drawn to legal notice dated 10.10.2025 and various other communications through e-mail, Whatsapp and LinkedIn, including through purported fake profiles, whereunder serious allegations are made against the plaintiff.
4. It is stated that even defendant No.2 has initiated legal proceedings against defendant no.1 before the competent Court at Bangalore, and a restraining order has been passed against defendant No.1.
5. It is the case of the plaintiff that if defendant no. 1 is not restrained by the Court, the plaintiff would suffer mental harassment and curtailment of her physical liberty.
6. The plaint be registered as a suit. Issue summons. Learned counsel on behalf of the defendant Nos.2 and 3 are present. They confirm the receipt of the suit paperbook and waives the right of formal service of summons.
7. Summons be issued to defendant No.1 by all permissible modes on filing of process fee. Affidavit of service be filed within two weeks.
8. Written statement(s) shall be filed within thirty days from today. The defendant shall also file affidavits of admission/denial of the documents filed by the plaintiffs, failing which, the written statements shall not be taken on record.
9. The plaintiffs are at liberty to file replications thereto within thirty days after filing of the written statements. The replications shall be accompanied by affidavits of admission/denial in respect of the documents filed by the defendant, failing which the replications shall not be taken on record.
10. It is made clear that any unjustified denial of documents may lead to an order of costs against the concerned party.
11. Any party seeking inspection of documents may do so in accordance with the Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 2018.
12. List before the learned Joint Registrar for completion of service and pleadings, marking of exhibits and admission/denial of documents on 30.03.2026.
I.A. 31959/2025 (injunction)
1. Notice.
2. Learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3 accepts notice.
3. On the petitioner taking necessary steps, let notice be issued to respondent No.1 through all permissible modes, returnable on the next date of hearing.
4. Mr. Arun Sri Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff, apprehends that owing to the allegedly defamatory communications, the government/departmental authorities are likely to be adversely influenced.
5. Needless to state that the Court has already taken cognizance of the instant application, therefore, the government/ departmental authorities may not be solely influenced by the communications unless otherwise they find any substance therein.
6. Prayer for the interim order shall be considered on the next date of hearing.
7. List on 04.02.2026.
