Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Dr. Gaurav Dahiya vs Mrs. Leenu Singh & Ors on 31 August, 2020

Author: Mukta Gupta

Bench: Mukta Gupta

$~9
*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+      CS(OS) 174/2020
       I.A. 5615/2020 (under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 CPC)
       DR. GAURAV DAHIYA                                         ..... Plaintiff
                Represented by:           Mr.Jasmeet Singh, Advocate.
                                 versus

       MRS. LEENU SINGH & ORS.                    ..... Defendant
                Represented by: Mr.Lalit Kumar, Advocate for
                                defendant No.1.
                                Ms.Mamta R.Jha, Advocate for
                                defendant No.2/Google LLC.
                                Mr.Deepak Gogia, Advocate for
                                defendant No.3/Twitter Inc.
                                Mr.Parag P. Tripathi, Sr.Advocate
                                with Mr.Ajit Warrier and Mr.Udit
                                Mendirata, Advocates for defendant
                                No.4/Facebook Inc.
       CORAM:
       HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
                          ORDER

% 31.08.2020 The hearing has been conducted through Video Conferencing. I.A. 7497/2020 (exemption from filing notarised affidavits-by defendant No.3/Twitter Inc.)

1. By this application, defendant No.3/Twitter Inc. seeks exemption from filing the affidavits in support of the written statement, reply affidavit to the application as also the affidavit of admission/denial which has been filed without notarisation.

2. Affidavits in support of the pleadings be filed within eight weeks.

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:JUSTICE
CS(OS) 174/2020                                                          PageGUPTA
                                                                      MUKTA        1 of 3
                                                                      Signing Date:31.08.2020
                                                                      19:31:45
 3.     Application is disposed of.
CS(OS) 174/2020

I.A. 5615/2020 (under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 CPC)

1. Learned counsel for the defendant No.4 states that the written statement and the reply affidavit to the application will be filed within the statutory period.

2. Learned counsel for the defendant No.2 states that she has filed the written statement today and she will ensure that the same is placed on record after removing the objections, if any.

3. Learned counsel for defendant No.1, the main contesting defendant, enters appearance and seeks time to file the written statement and reply to the application. He also states that the copies of the documents made available to him are not legible.

4. Learned counsel for defendant No.1 will provide his email address to learned counsel for the plaintiff in the course of the day who will within two days supply the fresh copies of the plaint, applications and the documents filed therewith. Written statement be filed within 30 days. Replication be filed within two weeks thereafter.

5. Learned counsel for the plaintiff states that despite the interim injunction being passed by this Court defendant No.1 continues to employ various platforms/handles to post and share the malicious and defamatory contents against the plaintiff and the plaintiff would thus file an application under Order XXXIX Rule 2A CPC.

6. Learned counsel for the defendant No.3 points out that in para-6 of the order dated 15th July, 2020 two inadvertent errors have crept in.

7. Consequently, para-6 of the order dated 15th July, 2020 would now Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:JUSTICE CS(OS) 174/2020 PageGUPTA MUKTA 2 of 3 Signing Date:31.08.2020 19:31:45 read as under:

"6. The plaintiff has also impleaded Google LLC, Twitter Inc. and Facebook Inc. as defendant Nos. 2, 3 and 4 respectively. Learned counsel for the defendant No. 2-Google LLC states that articles/posts are all newspapers' articles/news channels' reports which have been uploaded and the authenticity thereof would be only known to the news channels and thus, she states that they may be impleaded as parties in the suit. Considering the nature of posts put against the plaintiff, defendant No. 2-Google LLC is directed to take down/disable the posts/links from the country domain as mentioned in page 108 of the documents filed. As regards the defendant No. 3- Twitter Inc. is concerned, the tweets have been mentioned at pages 61-63 of the plaint in relation to the plaintiff. Defendant No. 3-Twitter Inc. is also directed to take down/disable the tweets from the country domain as mentioned in pages 61 to 63 of the plaint. The plaintiff is directed to provide the necessary URLs to the defendant No. 3 within three days who would within three days thereafter, take down the nine tweets as mentioned in the above-noted pages of the documents. The defendant No. 4-Facebook Inc. in the meantime, is also directed to take down the posts from the Facebook as mentioned in page 66 of the plaint within one week from the date of intimation of the order."

8. List on 24th December, 2020.

9. Interim order to continue.

10. Order be uploaded on the website of this Court.

MUKTA GUPTA, J.

AUGUST 31, 2020
'vn'




                                                                    Signature Not Verified
                                                                    Digitally Signed By:JUSTICE
CS(OS) 174/2020                                                        PageGUPTA
                                                                    MUKTA        3 of 3
                                                                    Signing Date:31.08.2020
                                                                    19:31:45