Bangalore District Court
Santhosh Menon vs Joseph Hoover on 22 March, 2024
KABC010244232021
IN THE COURT OF THE VII ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND
SESSIONS JUDGE, (CCH-19) AT BENGALURU.
DATED : THIS THE 22 ND DAY OF MARCH, 2024.
PRESENT: SRI. K.S. VIJAYA, B.COM , LLM.,
VII ADDL. CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS
JUDGE, BENGALURU.
O.S. NO.6089/2021
Plaintiff : Shri. Santosh Menon
S/o Late K.A. Menon
Aged about 59 years,
R/at No.384, 6th Cross
RMV 2nd Stage, 2nd Phase,
Bengaluru-560 094.
(By Smt. Lakshmi Menon., Advocate)
V/S
Defendant : Shri. Joseph Hoover
Father's name not known
Aged about 56 years
R/at No.116, God's Gift
4th Main 2nd Cross, Giridhama Layout,
Rajarajeshwari Nagar,
Bengaluru-560 098.
(By Sri. K.S.R., Advocate)
Date of institution of Suit 12-11-2021
Nature of the Suit Damages/Compensation
Date of commencement 30-06-2023
of recording of evidence
2
O.S.NO.6089/2021
Date on which Judgment 22-03-2024
was pronounced
Total duration Year/s Month/s Day/s
03 08 10
(K.S. VIJAYA)
VII ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND
SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU.
JUDGMENT
The Plaintiff has filed this suit for the relief of damages to the tune of Rs.25,00,000/- as he has suffered by the defamatory remarks made by the Defendant in various media, for Permanent Injunction restraining the Defendant from publishing defamatory content against the Plaintiff, either oral or written in print or video format, across any form of media including but not limited to print, social media and other forms of communication, for directing the Defendant to take down the defamatory posts published against the Plaintiff in all social media and other format of media and for directing the Defendant to publish an unconditional apology to the Plaintiff for all the defamatory remarks made against the Plaintiff in a prominent English newspaper and local language newspaper as well as in the social media platforms including Twitter, Facebook and 3 O.S.NO.6089/2021 Youtube, where the defamatory material was published by him against the Plaintiff.
2. The brief facts of the Plaintiff's case is that he is a reputed person in the society. He has studied in Bangalore Military School and graduated at Nijalingappa College, Bengaluru and holds a Bachelor's Decree in Science. He is running business in the name and style "Krishna Traders" which is a wholesale cement dealership for 35 years. The Plaintiff has also engaged in several real estate projects. In the professional life he has earned several awards.
3. It is submitted by the Plaintiff that he was interested in cricket as a sport from his tender age and played the sport at various levels. He has contributed for the betterment of cricket sport in the Karnataka State and associates with the cricket club "Vultures Cricket Club". The said club is a long standing and reputed cricket club.
4. It is further submitted by the Plaintiff that he has associated with the Karnataka State Cricket Association (KSCA). He become life member of KSCA in the year 1995. He was the part of several sub-committees. He was associated 4 O.S.NO.6089/2021 with the management of KSCA. Subsequently, he occupied the important positions in the administration of KSCA. Plaintiff was recognized for his honest, hard work and genuine interest for the game of cricket. In the year 2019, he was elected as the honorary Secretary of KSCA. He has been recognized for his exemplary administrative skills and for his dedication to the sport of cricket by the BCCI to represent the south zone.
5. It is submitted by the Plaintiff that the Defendant had a tendency to target various persons in power, particularly those who are emerged as successful in elections. He was tarnishing and lowering the reputation of such persons. The Defendant is making defamatory statements through social media platform such as Facebook, Twitter and other form of social media. He was habitually maligning the reputation of KSCA and its office bearers and also the members.
6. The Plaintiff has assumed prominence within and out side KSCA. The Defendant started making personal allegations against the Plaintiff which are defamatory in nature with an intention to tarnish the image of the Plaintiff in the society.
5
O.S.NO.6089/2021
7. Further it is submitted by the Plaintiff that the Defendant has been habitually making defamatory remarks against all the persons in KSCA and he has made it his business to tarnish the image of honest persons. The Defendant has lost his Vice-President election in October-2019 and started making allegations against the successful administrators.
8. Further it is submitted by the Plaintiff that the Defendant is a self-proclaimed independent journalist, wildlife activist, member of United Conservation Movement (UCM). He is active in different platforms of social media such as Facebook, Youtube, Twitter etc. The Defendant had made several disparaging remarks, without verifying the source of information or truth behind it. The Defendant used to pick and chose the information and published the same to lower the image of the Plaintiff in the eyes of public.
9. Further the Plaintiff has quoted the extracts of Facebook Post dated 02.05.2017, 28.06.2017, 10.12.2017, 14.01.2018, 27.04.2018, 03.05.2018, 08.08.2018, 29.10.2018, 05.12.2018, 08.11.2019, 11.11.2019, 30.11.2019, 3.12.2019, 18th and 19th of 2019, 20.12.2019, 31.12.2019, 07.02.2020, 6 O.S.NO.6089/2021 13.09.2020, 07.02.2021, 13.03.2021, 13.09.2021, 14.09.2021, 24.09.2021, 27.09.2021 and also stated about the whatsapp message dated 03.05.2018 and e-mail dated 25.08.2021.
10. By the above said publications, the Defendant has tarnished the image of the Defendant. Further it is submitted by the Plaintiff that the Defendant has also made serious allegation against the Plaintiff and other office bearers of KSCA stating that flouted the Hon'ble Supreme Court order including the directions of the committee of Administrators and Justice Lodha Committee. The Defendant without ascertaining the true facts has misinterpreted the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The Defendant was behaving as if enforcement authority. In fact the Ombudsman has passed the detailed order on 11.02.2020 clarifying the various legal provisions, hence the information published by the Defendant with regard to direction of Hon'ble Apex Court and Justice Lodha Committee are apparently shows that it was published with an intention to tarnish the image of the Plaintiff.
7
O.S.NO.6089/2021
11. Apart from that it is also submitted by the Plaintiff that the Defendant is facing litigations in the PCRs, Original Suits for defaming respective persons. Hence the Plaintiff has filed this suit for the above said relief against the Defendant.
12. Upon service of summons, the Defendant has appeared through his counsel and has filed written statement by denying all the plaint averments. Further it is submitted by the Defendant that he is a reputed, diligent, prolific and passionate cricket writer and columnist. The Defendant has been fearlessly reporting, writing and exposing the scandals, misdeeds, hypocrisy, selfish attitude, acts and deeds affecting the game of the cricket . It is submitted by the Defendant that as per the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court after acceptance of Justice Lodha Committee reforms, most of the office bearers of KSCA have become disqualified and many of them have resigned voluntarily and moved out of administration of KSCA. Justice Lodha Committee restricted the contesting candidates from offering gifts to induce them to vote, host parties etc., The Defendant has been writing about the game, players and society in the larger interest. He has written only the truth in his career of journalism. He has worked in Indian Express, Deccan 8 O.S.NO.6089/2021 Herland, Times of India as editor for sports column. He has been constructively critical about BCCI and KSCA only to ensure that talented players get opportunity to represent the state and the country. He has travelled along with Indian Cricket Team across the whole world and has written and published hundreds of articles to expose high handedness of the administrators of the cricket. The Plaintiff instead of addressing the issues has preferred this suit.
13. Further it is submitted by the Defendant that he being the coach of one of the Karnataka Premier League, a T20 cricket tournament has reported about match fixing, spot fixing incidents taken place in the said tournament. The administrators have ignored such incidents. The Plaintiff would have interfered and set right the lapses of many incidents. Apart from the above said incident of spot fixing and match fixing, plaintiff failed to raise to the occasion and he remained silent. Being the writer, sports reporter, the Defendant has expressed his personal opinion in his designated face book page. Hence the same will not amount to any offence under the law. Such expression of his opinion is his fundamental right. Inspite of the same, the Plaintiff has filed this false and frivolous suit. The Defendant 9 O.S.NO.6089/2021 being the President of an affiliated club of KSCA used to receive inputs from fellow office bearers. The Defendant has taken up some issues where it has come to his knowledge that injustice is being caused and he has raised his voice seeking justice. The Defendant is not having any predetermined prejudices, ego clashes with anyone.
14. Further it is contended by the Defendant that the Plaintiff has miserably failed to raise his voice at KSCA with regard to match fixing and spot fixing in KPL Tournaments and has failed in his duties.
15. Further it is contended by the Defendant that he has not written anything against the Plaintiff to defame him and hence the suit of the Plaintiff is liable to be dismissed with cost. It is also contended by the Defendant that similar suit have been filed by the members of KSCA of Mysore, Belgaum and Shivamogga. The Defendant has not caused any defamation to any sports personalities. He is only critical on the game and the way in which the game is conducted and played. The present suit is filed by the Plaintiff with malafide intention and prayed for dismissal of the suit.
10
O.S.NO.6089/2021
16. Basing on the above said pleadings and other materials available on record, my predecessor-in-office was pleased to frame the following issues;-
ISSUES
1. Whether the Plaintiff is entitled for directing the Defendant to pay sum of Rs.25,00,000/- as damages as prayed ?
2. Whether Plaintiff is entitled for the Permanent Injunction against Defendant as prayed ?
3. Whether Plaintiff is entitled for directing Defendant to take down the defamatory post published against the Plaintiff as prayed ?
4. Whether Plaintiff is entitled for directing the Defendant to publish an unconditional apology as prayed ?
5. What order or decree ?
ADDL. ISSUE FRAMED ON 09.03.2023.
1. Whether the Plaintiff proves that the Defendant has engaged in libel as against the Plaintiff thereby causing harm to his reputation ? 11
O.S.NO.6089/2021
17. In order to prove the above said issues, the Plaintiff got himself examined as PW.1 and got marked as many as 40 documents as per Ex.P1 to Ex.P40. Inspite of sufficient opportunity was given, the Defendant did not appear before the court and has not cross examined the PW.1. The Defendant has also not lead evidence on his behalf.
18. Heard arguments of the learned counsel for the Plaintiff. Defendant did not submit any arguments. After considering oral as well as documentary evidence and after hearing arguments of learned counsel for the Plaintiff, my answer to the above issues are;-
ISSUE NO.1 : Plaintiff is entitled for the damages to the extent of Rs.1,00,000/-.
ISSUE NO.2 : In the Affirmative. ISSUE NO.3 : In the Affirmative. ISSUE NO.4 : In the Affirmative.
ADDL.ISSUE FRAMED : In the Affirmative.
ON 09.03.2023
ISSUE NO.5 : As per final order;-
12
O.S.NO.6089/2021
REASONS
19. ADDL.ISSUE FRAMED ON 09.03.2023 : In
order to prove his case, the Plaintiff got himself examined before the court as PW.1. In his chief examination affidavit, he has reiterated all the plaint averments. During the course of his further chief examination, he has got marked the Ex.P1 to Ex.P5 to show that he is a respectable person in the society. There is no contrary evidence to disbelieve the fame of the Plaintiff as claimed by him in the present suit. Ex.P1 to Ex.P5 substantiate his claim with regard to his reputation in the society.
20. The Ex.P6 to Ex.P34 are the alleged articles of defamation published by the Defendant in his Facebook and also shared in the whatsapp. I have perused the Ex.P6 to Ex.P34. Among them the Ex.P6 to Ex.P11 are not revealing the name of the Plaintiff and also not revealing about any defamatory sentence affecting the reputation of the Plaintiff. Ex.P6 to Ex.P8 are with regard to maladministration of KSCA. Ex.P9 is an article about not following the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court by KSCA. Ex.P10 is about the President and Secretary of KSCA. Ex.P9 is with regard to calling the Plaintiff 13 O.S.NO.6089/2021 for panel discussion. The said articles in the said documents are not causing harm to the reputation of the Plaintiff. In the same way, Ex.P16 to Ex.P19, Ex.P32 and Ex.P34 are not having any defamatory statement against the Plaintiff which can be ascertained by reading the said article. Ex.P35 and Ex.P36 are the copy of invitation to the Plaintiff and copy of email to the Plaintiff. The same are also not the documents to prove the allegations of defamation against the Defendant.
21 I have perused Ex.P12 to Ex.P14, Ex.P20 to Ex.P31 and Ex.P33. Among them Ex.P21 and Ex.P22 are the same articles, articles in Ex.P23 and Ex.P24 are one and the same. Similarly Ex.P25 and Ex.P26 are the same articles. I have perused the above said articles in detail. Among them, the following documents are containing the words which may cause harm to the reputation of the Plaintiff. The details of contents of the articles which may cause harm to the reputation of the Plaintiff are as bellow;-
Ex.P12 : "(This is precisely what has happened in the Karnataka State Cricket Association. The game has been badly affected as couple of managing members have called the shots. Santosh Menon in particular has been a bane for Karnataka 14 O.S.NO.6089/2021 cricket)".
Ex.P13 : "But the good work of the two Indian legends were shattered by assistant secretary Santosh Menon. Selections were bizzarre. Only players who represented certain clubs found favour of the junior selection committees. There were allegations of payment being made to one of the senior selectors".
Ex.P14 : "Now, we understand why Sanjay Desai, Sudhakar 'Parcel' Rao, Santhosh Menon refused to share it".
Ex.P20 : "Sometime ago, Menon had been questioned by the Directors of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) at the Bangalore airport when he returned from Germany on his father's demise.
It is a shame that the KSCA secretary has been implicated in the KPL match-fixing scam. Last month KSCA managing committee member Sudhindra Shinde had been arrested for motivating cricketers to fix matches". Ex.P21 : "The investigation team seized a laptop, iPad and and mobile phone of Menon during the raid at Ex.P22 his residence.
The controversial KSCA secretary was let go on the assurance of the senior IPS officer. 15
O.S.NO.6089/2021 It is disappointing that a police office of repute has thrust a spoke in the free flowing wheel of the investigation team.
The CCB has done commendable work in unearthing the multi-crore match-fixing scan. The tech-savvy police officer should not protect 'thugs' who have destroyed the reputation of Karnataka State Cricket Association and the good name of cricket.
We request chief minister Yeddyurappa to give the CCB a free hand to get to the bottom of the scandal".
Ex.P23 : "It is common knowledge that no government and department/agency would raid someone's house Ex.P24 without evidence. No judge would issue a search warrant without clinching/corroborative evidence". Ex.P25 : "It is everyone's knowledge that Santosh and Menon escaped being arrested as a very Ex.P26 senior Indian Police Service (IPS) officer had intervened in the neck of time, for reasons best known to him".
Ex.P27 : "It is tragedy that one KSCA managing committee members was arrested for his involvement in spot/match-fixing.
Even the house of the KSCA secretary, Santosh Menon, was raided by sleuths of the 16 O.S.NO.6089/2021 Central Crime Branch.
CCB had sought the approval of the court to raid Menon's house. He was on the verge of being arrested, but political pressure bailed him out. For now".
Ex.P28 : "Santosh Menon continued as secretary.
If BCCI had truly desired to cleanse the stinking, corrupt cricket system, it should have asked Menon and Shinde to stay away from cricket administration until the KPL match- fixing investigation was completed". Ex.P29 : "KSCA secretary Santosh Menon's house was raided by the CCB, after obtaining the legal nod from the court.
But they continue to hold sway.
There are allegations that politicians have stalled the match-fixing investigation. One politician was rewarded too".
Ex.P30 : "Would any of you, if you have true concern, protect a predator who seeks sexual favour and ask for nude pictures from anyone of your family members ?"
Ex.P31 : "But his protege, the current KSCA secretary, Santosh Menon, whose house had been raided by Central Crime Branch during the 17 O.S.NO.6089/2021 KPL match-fixing investigation, is protecting a sexual predator in the KSCA cricket academy. The reputation of KSCA and Karnataka Cricket was tarnished as authorities did not take match- fixing allegations seriously. Someone's attitude could soon find the beleaguered association in an embarrassing situation.
Hope wiser counsel prevails".
Ex.P33 : "They were annoyed with KSCA secretary Santosh Menon (then assistant secretary) interfering in the team composition".
22. The plain reading of such articles itself, it can be said that the same will cause harm to the reputation of the Plaintiff, unless it is proved that such articles are containing truth.
23. As per the decision relied by the learned counsel for the Plaintiff reported in AIR 1961 PAT 164 between Pandey Surendra Nath Sinha and Another V/s Bageshwari Pd in an action for libel the Plaintiff should prove that the statement complained of (1) refers to him; (2) it is in writing, (3) 18 O.S.NO.6089/2021 it is defamatory and was published by the Defendant to a third person or persons.
24. Here in the present case, in the above said exhibits it is clearly forthcoming that the said article refers to the Plaintiff, the same is in writing. The Plain reading of the said articles clearly goes to show that it is defamatory and the above said documents clearly goes to show that the same was published in the social media i.e., Facebook of Defendant.
25. In this circumstance, as per the above said decision, it is for the Defendant to establish the defence recognized by law. The Defendant in his written statement has taken the contention that he has published such articles in the interest of the game. According to him, the said contents of the articles are his personal opinion. According to him publishing his personal opinion is not an offence of defamation. As sports journalist, he has analyzed the situation. But in order to prove his defence and also prove that the above said articles are containing the truth, the Defendant has not cross examined the PW.1 and also has not opted to lead evidence from his side. 19
O.S.NO.6089/2021
26. In the absence of any contrary evidence, I am of the opinion that the version of the Plaintiff is to be believed. As per the above said contents of Ex.P12 to Ex.P14, Ex.P20 to Ex.31 and Ex.33, the defamatory articles were referring to the Plaintiff. The same will cause harm to the reputation of the Plaintiff. The same is amount to libel against the Plaintiff. Hence I proceed to hold the Addl. Issue framed on 09.03.2023 in the Affirmative.
27. ISSUE NO.1: The Plaintiff has sought for damages of Rs.25,00,000/-. I have perused the entire pleadings of the Plaintiff and also his oral as well as documentary evidence. Though the Plaintiff is succeeded in proving the fact that the Defendant has caused the act of libel against him, the Plaintiff has not proved that because of such act of the Defendant, the Plaintiff has suffered any financial loss or has lost any opportunities for which he was entitled. In the absence of such financial loss or loss of opportunity for which the Plaintiff was entitled, I am of the opinion that the Plaintiff is not entitled for the quantum of compensation which he has sought. But such act of the Defendant would have caused the mental agony and sufferance to the Plaintiff. For suffering such mental agony 20 O.S.NO.6089/2021 and sufferance, I am of the opinion that the Plaintiff may be awarded damages. By considering the nature of articles and the nature of mental agony which the Plaintiff has suffered, I am of the opinion that the Plaintiff may be awarded damages to the extent of Rs.1,00,000/-. Hence I proceed to hold the Issue No.1 accordingly.
28. ISSUE NO.2: As discussed above, the Plaintiff has proved the fact that the Defendant has published defamatory article and he has expressed his apprehension that the Defendant may continued to make such publications. Hence I am of the opinion that the Plaintiff is entitled for the relief of Permanent Injunction against the Defendant as sought. Hence I proceed to hold the Issue No.2 in the Affirmative.
29. ISSUES NO.3 AND 4: Further as discussed above, the Plaintiff has proved the publishing of defamatory article in Ex.P12 to Ex.P14, Ex.P20 to Ex.P31 and Ex.P33. Hence it would be necessary for directing the Defendant to delete such defamatory post published against the Plaintiff. Further as the Plaintiff has proved the act of causing defamation by the Defendant by making publication in his Facebook, I am of the opinion that the Defendant may be directed to tender 21 O.S.NO.6089/2021 unconditional apology to the Plaintiff and shall publish the same in 2 Daily Newspapers one of such newspaper is English Newspaper and another one is Kannda Newspaper and Defendant may be directed to publish such apology in his Facebook page where defamatory articles were published within 90 days from the date of this judgment.
30. Considering all these facts and circumstance, I proceed to hold the Issues No.3 and 4 in the Affirmative.
31. ISSUE NO.5: For the foregoing reasons, I proceed to pass the following;-
ORDER The suit of the Plaintiff is decreed in part.
The Defendant is hereby directed to pay Rs.1,00,000/- to the Plaintiff as damages for harming the reputation of the Plaintiff.
The Defendant is hereby restrained from publishing any defamatory article against the Plaintiff in any mode and in manner.
22
O.S.NO.6089/2021 The Defendant is hereby directed to delete the publication made by him in his Facebook, Whatsapp and Twitter which are containing the defamatory article against the Plaintiff.
Further the Defendant is hereby directed to tender his unconditional apology to the Plaintiff for making the above said defamatory articles in any two Daily Newspapers i.e., one English Daily Newspaper and one Kannada Daily Newspaper having wide circulation in Karnataka and the Defendant is also directed to publish such apology in his Facebook page, where defamatory articles were published within 90 days from the date of this judgment.
Office is directed to draw decree accordingly.
(Dictated to the Stenographer transcribed by him and print out taken thereof is revised, corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in Open Court on this the 22 nd day of March, 2024).
(K.S. VIJAYA) VII ADDL. CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU.
23
O.S.NO.6089/2021 ANNEXURE Witnesses examined on behalf of Plaintiff:
P.W.1 - Santosh Menon Documents marked on behalf of Plaintiff:
Ex.P.1 Photo printout of the award given for performance excellence by ACC Cements Ex.P.2 Photo printout of the award given for Long term Association and Significant Contribution towards promoting sales of Birla Super and Ultra Tech Cement given by Ultra Tech Cement Ex.P.3 Photo printout of the award given for performance at Grand Dealer Meet-2016 - Karnataka Ex.P.4 Photo printout of the award given at Premium Dealers Meet - 18th May, 2018 at Singapore Ex.P.5 Photo printout of the Special award given for performance by Bharathi Cement Ex.P.6 Copy of Facebook post uploaded by Defendant on 02.05.2017.
Ex.P.7 Copy of Facebook post uploaded by Defendant on 28.06.2017.
Ex.P.8 Copy of Facebook post uploaded by Defendant on 10.12.2017.
Ex.P.9 Copy of Facebook post uploaded by Defendant on 14.01.2018 Ex.P.10 Copy of Facebook post uploaded by Defendant on 27.04.2018.
Ex.P.11 Copy of Facebook post uploaded by Defendant on 03.05.2018 24 O.S.NO.6089/2021 Ex.P.12 Printout of Watsapp message in the group sent by the Defendant Ex.P.13 Copy of Facebook post uploaded by Defendant on 08.08.2018 Ex.P.14 Copy of Facebook post uploaded by Defendant on 29.10.2018 Ex.P.15 Copy of Facebook post uploaded by Defendant on 05.12.2018 Ex.P.16 Copy of Facebook post uploaded by Defendant on 08.11.2019 Ex.P.17 Copy of Facebook post uploaded by Defendant on 11.11.2019 Ex.P.18 Copy of Facebook post uploaded by Defendant on 30.11.2019 Ex.P.19 Copy of Facebook post uploaded by Defendant on 03.12.2019 Ex.P.20 Copy of Facebook post uploaded by Defendant on 19.12.2019 Ex.P.21 Copy of Facebook post uploaded by Defendant on 20.12.2019 Ex.P.22 Printout of Watsapp message in the group sent by the Defendant on 20.12.2019 Ex.P.23 Copy of Facebook post uploaded by Defendant on 31.12.2019 Ex.P.24 Printout of Watsapp message in the group sent by the Defendant Ex.P.25 Copy of Facebook post uploaded by Defendant on 07.02.2020 25 O.S.NO.6089/2021 Ex.P.26 Printout of Watsapp message in the group sent by the Defendant Ex.P.27 Copy of Facebook post uploaded by Defendant on 13.09.2020 Ex.P.28 Copy of Facebook post uploaded by Defendant on 07.02.2021 Ex.P.29 Copy of Facebook post uploaded by Defendant on 13.03.2021 Ex.P.30 Copy of E-mail sent by Defendant to Senior members of KSCA dated 25.08.2021 Ex.P.31 Copy of Facebook post uploaded by Defendant on 13.09.2021 Ex.P.32 Copy of Facebook post uploaded by Defendant on 14.09.2021 Ex.P.33 Copy of Facebook post uploaded by Defendant on 24.09.2021 Ex.P.34 Copy of Facebook post uploaded by Defendant on 27.09.2023.
Ex.P.35 Copy of invitation addressed by GIZ (German International Development Corporation) to the Plaintiff Ex.P.36 Copy of E-mail by GIZ to the Plaintiff dated 11.11.2021 Ex.P.37 Certified copy of the order sheet of W.P No.10176/2020 along with the order dated 23.11.2020 Ex.P.38 Certified copy of the order sheet of O.S 8864/2018 along with copy of the order dated 11.12.2018 26 O.S.NO.6089/2021 Ex.P.39 Copy of the order passed by Ethics Officer cum Ombudsmen, Karnataka State Cricket Association, Bangalore. (Sec.65-B Certificate is filed as the same was obtained from the official website of Karnataka State Cricket Association). Ex.P.40 Sec.65-B Certificate with regard to Ex.P.39 Witness examined Documents marked on behalf of Defendant:
- Nil -
VII ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU.