Delhi High Court - Orders
Twitter Inc vs Tata Sia Arilines Limited & Ors on 12 September, 2022
Author: Vibhu Bakhru
Bench: Vibhu Bakhru
$~4
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ FAO(OS) (COMM) 154/2022 & CM APPL. 28050/2022,
28051/2022, 28052/2022, 28053/2022, 28054/2022 & 40107/2022
TWITTER INC ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. Sajan Poovayya, Sr. Adv. with
Mr. Manu Kulkarni, Mr. Saransh Jain,
Ms. Shloka Narayanan, Mr. Ankit
Agarwal, Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Ms.
Alvia Ahmed, Ms. Pragya Agarwal,
Mr. Abhishek Kakkar & Ms. Raksha
Agarwal, Advs.
versus
TATA SIA ARILINES LIMITED & ORS ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Pravin Anand, Mr. Achutam
Shreekumar & Mr. Rohit Bansal,
Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN
ORDER
% 12.09.2022
1. The appellant has filed the present appeal impugning an order dated 18.04.2022, passed by the learned Single Judge in IA 5950/2022 in CS (COMM) 40/2022, directing Twitter Inc to furnish certain details in respect of the handle @VistaraEmployee and also take down certain tweets.
2. Mr. Sajan Poovayya, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant states that the appellant was not a party to the suit as on 18.04.2022; it was impleaded subsequently.
3. He states that on the strength of the impugned order, the respondents have called upon Twitter Inc to take down certain tweets globally, however, Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:HARMINDER KAUR FAO(OS) (COMM) 154/2022 Page 1 of 2 Signing Date:15.09.2022 17:13:35 there is no order of the learned Single Judge directing the same. He states that the appellant is essentially aggrieved in regard to the respondent's interpretation that certain tweets must be taken down globally.
4. Mr. Pravin Anand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents, referred to paragraph 10 of the impugned order and submitted that the learned Single Judge has granted the defendant, liberty to seek modification of the impugned order, if necessary.
5. He submits that respondents would have no difficulty if the applicability of Paragraph 10 of the impugned order is also extended to the appellant in this case.
6. It is apparent from the impugned order that the learned Single Judge had granted liberty to the defendant to seek modification of the order if necessary. Since Twitter Inc was impleaded as a party subsequent to the said order, it is obvious that Twitter Inc would also have the liberty to apply for modification if necessary.
7. In view of the above, Mr. Poovayya seeks to withdraw the present appeal while reserving all rights and contentions of the appellant.
8. The appeal is dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty.
9. It is clarified that nothing stated in this order shall be construed as an expression of opinion (prima facie or otherwise) on the merits of the controversy or the impugned order.
VIBHU BAKHRU, J AMIT MAHAJAN, J SEPTEMBER 12, 2022/SS Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:HARMINDER KAUR FAO(OS) (COMM) 154/2022 Page 2 of 2 Signing Date:15.09.2022 17:13:35