Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Sahara Prime City Limited vs Outlook Publishing India Private ... on 27 August, 2010
Author: Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta
Bench: Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta
010
A.S.T 555 of 2010
with
A.S.T.A 217 of 2010
Sahara Prime City Limited
Vs.
Outlook Publishing India Private Limited & Ors.
Mr. Anindya Kumar Mitra,
Mr. Abhrajit Mitra,
Ms. Rajshree Kajaria,
Mr. Jishnu Chowdhury ......... For the appellant
Certified copy of the impugned order dated 25th August, 2010 filed today be kept on
record.
We have heard Mr. Anindya Kumar Mitra, learned senior counsel and we have gone
through the impugned judgment and order appealed against.
This appeal is admitted and will be heard.
In Re : A.S.T.A 217 of 2010
It appears to us that the learned trial Judge himself prima facie was of the view that the
statements made by the defendants are apparently defamatory. Even after coming to prima facie
conclusion as above, the learned trial Judge refused to grant ad-interim relief. The learned trial
Judge, appears to us, has overlooked the prima facie case of urgency having been made out in
the petition.
The action of this nature is such that unless ad-interim order is granted on prima facie
finding of defamation, very purpose of filing of the suit becomes defeated and frustrated. If there
is no interim protection then defendants will go on publishing, if the court is to wait for service of
notice.
Therefore, while weighing the balance of convenience and inconvenience, if the order of
injunction is granted in favour of the petitioner in terms of prayer (b), then the defendants and
each of them do not stand to loose anything else. On the other hand, if the injunction is not
granted, the appellant/plaintiff will suffer irreparable loss and injury, as injury to the reputation
cannot be compensated in terms of money.
Having noted prima facie findings of the learned trial Judge in favour of the
plaintiff/petitioner and having gone through independently the statement made, and the way the
2
news item was projected in the magazine published in every fortnight, the same appears to be
prima facie defamatory.
Therefore, it is a fit case where requirement of service of prior notice as provided under
Order XXXIX Rule 3 proviso of the Code of Civil Procedure is required to be dispensed with and
the same is hereby dispensed with.
Let there be an interim order of injunction in terms of prayer (b) of the petition and this
interim order will continue for a period of three weeks from date or until further order, whichever
is earlier.
Copy of this application shall be served upon the respondents forthwith by speed post
and/or any other quickest mode of communication including facsimile communication and file affidavit-of-service on the next date of hearing.
Matter will appear fortnight hence before the appropriate Bench. Xerox plain copy of this order, duly countersigned by the Assistant Registrar (Court), be given to learned Counsel for the parties upon making application for obtaining Xerox certified copy of this order. In the event, Xerox certified copy is not taken delivery of, in spite of being notified; the effect of the Xerox plain copy will stand extinguished.
(Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, J.) (Kanchan Chakraborty, J.)