Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi High Court - Orders

Gati Ltd vs Google Llc & Anr on 3 March, 2020

Author: Rajiv Sahai Endlaw

Bench: Rajiv Sahai Endlaw

$~24
*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+      CS(OS) 83/2020 & IAs No.2720/2020 (u/O XXXIX R-1&2 CPC),
       2721/2020 (u/S 79 of IT Act), 2722/2020 (for exemption), 2723/2020
       (u/S 149 CPC), 2724/2020 (for exemption from filing original
       documents) & 2725/2020 (u/O V R-9 CPC)

       GATI LTD.                                           ..... Plaintiff
                          Through:     Mr. Pavan Duggal, Mr. Shaivesh
                                       Kamra, Mr. Mohit Raj and Mr.
                                       Nirmal Kumar, Advs.

                                Versus
    GOOGLE LLC & ANR                                          ..... Defendants
                  Through: None.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW
                          ORDER

% 03.03.2020

1. The counsel for the plaintiff, in response to the queries made and recorded in the order dated 26th February, 2020, has drawn attention to pages 85 to 88 of Part-III-A file and to paragraph 17 of the plaint where the plaintiff has generally pleaded the statements made on pages 85 to 88 to be defamatory and false.

2. The statements contained at pages 85 to 88 are on the basis of annual report of the plaintiff and on the basis of delay in projects undertaken by the plaintiff and the plaintiff has neither expressly pleaded how the said statements are false nor filed documents to demonstrate the falsity of the statements.

3. The plaintiff, a Public Limited Company, shares of which are stated to be widely held and are quoted in BSE and NSE, are in public domain and its affairs including its accounts and performance of contracts are also in public domain and the shareholders of the plaintiff are entitled to know about the correct state of affairs. Once a statement with reference to contracts and annual reports are made, for the plaintiff to be entitled to have the said statement removed, the plaintiff has to demonstrate falsity thereof, inasmuch as if the statements are true, there can be no removal of the same from public domain.

4. The counsel for the plaintiff states that he will file the requisite documents.

5. The plaintiff to also file an affidavit of its Managing Director, Mr. Mahendra Kumar Aggarwal, setting out specifically, which of the statements on the blogspot.com are false, and demonstrating how the same are false and contrary to the records of the plaintiff.

6. On request, the affidavit is permitted to be filed within four weeks.

7. List on 30th April, 2020.

RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J.

MARCH 03, 2020 „shw‟..