Karnataka High Court
D S Vishwanatha Shetty vs S Amarnath on 7 August, 2012
Author: Ravi Malimath
Bench: Ravi Malimath
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE
ON THE 7th DAY OF AUGUST 2012
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH
RFA.No.764/2003
BETWEEN:
D.S.Vishwanatha Shetty, 44 years
S/o.Sesha Shetty
Editor, Publisher and
Printer of the weekly
"Tunga Varthe"
Azar Road, Thirthahalli
Shimoga District. ....APPELLANT
(By Smt.K.T.Gurudeva Prasad, Advocate)
AND
S.Amarnath, 55 years
S/o.Amruta Rao,
Cloth Merchant,
R/at Kelaginapet
Koppa Town
Chikmagalur District ...RESPONDENT
(By Sriyuths.B.H.Shamanna and A.S.Girish, Advocates)
-0-0-0-0-
This RFA is filed under Section 96 of CPC against
the judgment and decree dated 13.3.2003 passed in
2
O.S.No.140/96 on the file of the Civil Judge(Sr.Dn),
Chikmagalur, decreeing the suit for damages.
This appeal coming on for hearing this day, the
court delivered the following:-
JUDGMENT
Aggrieved by the judgment and decree decreeing the suit of the plaintiff for damages in a sum of Rs.One Lakh, the defendant has filed the present appeal.
2. The parties will be referred to as per their rank in the trial Court.
3. The case of the plaintiff is that he along with his father and brother was doing partnership business in readymade garments, cloth business and furnishing fabrics since 65 years under the name and style of "M/s.S.Amrutrao and Sons". Their firm had built up a very good name for honesty and credibility. The plaintiff is a highly respected man in the society. The defendant is the Editor, printer and publisher of the Kannada weekly under the name and style of "Thunga Varthe" 3
and he is the sole proprietor of the printing press. The paper has a circulation in Koppa, Shringeri and Narasimharajapura Taluks also. It is well known among the people that the weekly generally publishes scandalous articles maligning the reputation of people without there being any material to justify the same. The defendant under his authorship has published an article in his weekly dated 27.9.1996 under the caption, translated as "Suicide of Sujatha, an employee of Amruthrao Cloth Merchant". That article was replete with false and defamatory imputations against the plaintiff with a view to lower his reputation. The plaintiff has been referred as a cheat and womanizer and leading an immoral life with the sales girls working in his firm. The plaintiff contends that what is published therein is a blatant falsehood. Nodoubt there are sales girls employed in his firm, but they have been working for a number of years and they come from a respectable families. Since it is the business of readymade garments etc. sales girls are necessarily 4 employed. Aspersions are cast even on the sales girls working in his shop. The plaintiff is of the view that the same is motivated and intended to harass the plaintiff and that it may be a ruse to threaten the plaintiff in order to collect money from him. Under these circumstances, the plaintiff filed the suit seeking for damages for loss of reputation, mental agony suffered by him in a sum of Rs. One Lakh as the consequence of the publication of the defamatory article.
4. On contest, the trial Court decreed the suit in a sum of Rs.One Lakh. Aggrieved by the same, the defendant has filed the present appeal.
5. The learned counsel for the defendant submits that the impugned judgment is bad in law and liable to be set aside. The trial Court has not appreciated the material evidence on record while decreeing the suit. The trial Court should have seen that what has been published is a mere reflection of the material received by him. He has not contributed 5 anything to the said publication. It is the sister of the deceased who has written the letter based on which the article is published. The trial Court has committed an error and therefore, interference is called for.
6. The respondent defends the impugned judgment.
7. Heard learned counsels and examined the records.
8. The trial Court while decreeing the suit, took note of the manner in which the publication has been made; that imputations have been made against the plaintiff questioning his honesty and integrity and that allegations have been made against the plaintiff with regard to his relationship with the sales girls employed by him. The evidence of the parties have also been considered. Under these circumstances, the trial Court was of the opinion that the publication has amounted to defaming the name of the plaintiff.
6
9. The counsel for the defendant contends that what has been published is a mere reflection of a letter written by the sister of the deceased dated 25.9.1996 to the defendant, so also the affidavit given by the very same person narrating the said facts vide Exs.D3 and D4.
10. On a reading of the publication made and on considering the evidence on record, it cannot be said that what has been published is only what is narrated in Exs.D3 and D4. The defendant has gone much beyond that. Serious imputations have been made against the plaintiff. He has questioned his integrity, honesty and attitude towards women and aspersions have been cost on him as to the manner in which the sales girls are treated by him. Various allegations have been imputed in the article to the said effect. On a plain reading of the same, no other conclusion can be arrived at except the fact that the intention of the defendant is quite clear and unambiguous. It is not a mere reflection of Exs.D3 and D4. He has gone beyond 7 that. Under these circumstances, it is a clear case where reputation of the plaintiff has been marred by this publication. The finding recorded by the trial Court is just and proper and is in tune with the facts, circumstances and evidence. I do not find any error that calls for any interference.
11. It is by the sister of the deceased. Naturally she is interested. It is not a mere publication of what the defendant received. He has made his own inputs to the article. It is not restricted to Ex.D3 and D4. Hence, his defence cannot be accepted. It is mala-fide. The suit is of the year 1986. Even after long lapse of time, there is no remorse insofar as the defendant is concerned. There is no apology offered by him. There is no regret expressed by him. His case is one of defence. His case is that the publication is the reflection of Exs.D3 and D4. By the order dated 27.10.03, the appeal was admitted subject to the appellant depositing 30% of the decreetal amount within eight weeks from that date. Even as on date the said amount has not been 8 deposited. Under these circumstances also, I' am of the considered view that the appeal requires to be rejected. On considering the material on record, it is proved beyond doubt that substantial damage to the image and reputation of the plaintiff has occurred. What he has sought for is too meagre. However, in the given facts and circumstances of the case, the judgment being just and proper, I do not find any grounds to interfere.
12. Consequently, the appeal being devoid of merits is dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE *alb/-