Bombay High Court
House Of Abhinandan Lodha vs Atulyam Infratech Private Limited on 1 April, 2026
Author: Milind N. Jadhav
Bench: Milind N. Jadhav
P7.SL.11542.2026+.doc
HARSHADA H. SAWANT
(P.A.)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
SUIT (L) NO.11542 OF 2026
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO.11640 OF 2026
House of Abhinandan Lodha Private Limited .. Plaintiff
Versus
Atulyam Infratech Private Limited and Ors. .. Defendants
....................
Dr. Abhinav Chandrachud a/w. Mr. Rashid Boatwall, Ms. Lipsa
Unadkat, Mr. Pranav Kethineni, Advocates i/by Manilal Kher
Ambalal & Co. for Plaintiff / Applicant.
...................
CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
DATE : APRIL 01, 2026
P.C.:
1. Not on Board. Mentioned by way of filing praecipe dated 01.04.2026. Perused the praecipe.
2. Heard Mr. Chandrachud, learned Advocate for Plaintiff / Applicant.
3. Mr. Chandrachud seeks urgent intervention and indulgence of the Court while drawing my attention to the post LinkedIn, copy of which is appended at Exhibit-I, page No.126. That post is by Defendant No.2 who is Director of Defendant No.1. He would submit that mere title of the said post and further contents thereof are prima facie defamatory in the context of the name and business operations of the Plaintiff causing substantial reputational damage. He would submit that Defendant No.1 was appointed as a sub-broker to market 1 of 4 ::: Uploaded on - 01/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 01/04/2026 21:36:19 ::: P7.SL.11542.2026+.doc the business of Plaintiff. He would inform the Court and necessary averment to that effect is made in the Suit plaint about he having filed a Suit for compensation of Rs.5 Crores which is referred to mediation by Delhi High Court. He would submit that nexus is prima facie evident from the contentious post appended at Exhibit-I.
4. However labelling Plaintiff as one of the biggest real estate scams of recent times and labelling direct insinuations to the Plaintiff having promoted his project by impersonating association with the term 'Lodha' as a sister Company and used the same as key marketing pitch is prima facie incorrect. This is so because admittedly the nomenclature of the Plaintiff namely HOABL as it stands for has been segregated and separated from the word / term 'Lodha' which is of the sister concern.
5. What is disturbing is the fact that considering the expanse of the business of the Plaintiff, Dr. Chandrachud would draw my attention to page No.130 onwards wherein substantial number of comments have been garnered to the said post, inter alia, stating that the Plaintiff is a fraud builder thereby affecting its reputation, brand and causing substantial damage.
6. Considering that pre-Suit mediation has been invoked in the commercial Suit filed by the Defendant Nos.1 and 2 in the Delhi High Court, the disparaging remarks, words and tagline used in the post 2 of 4 ::: Uploaded on - 01/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 01/04/2026 21:36:19 ::: P7.SL.11542.2026+.doc appended at page No.126 in my opinion is prima facie defamatory for the simple reason that no citizen of this country can label Companies by such extreme superlative taglines and title in an insinuating way in the manner which it is done and as can be read from page No.1226.
7. In that view of the matter, an arguable case has been made out by Dr. Chandrachud for grant of immediate ex parte ad-interim reliefs after perusing the grounds.
8. Ad-interim relief is granted in terms of prayer clause (iii) of the Interim Application which reads thus:-
"iii. Pending the hearing and final disposal of the Suit, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to pass an Order and Injunction, restraining the Defendant Nos.1 to 3 either by themselves or through their employees, agents, officers, assign, representatives or associates from further publishing any defamatory material in respect of the Applicant in any manner and on any forum and through any form of media whatsoever and from further making any defamatory/offending statements/ letters/ correspondences against the Applicant with regard to the subject matter of the defamatory publications."
9. Dr. Chandrachud would persuade me to consider grant of prayer clauses (i) and (iv) in view of the fact that the impugned post has garnered several likes and comments, transcripts of which are placed before the Court which infact amplify and call for further insinuations and damage causing to the name and prospects of Plaintiff.
3 of 4 ::: Uploaded on - 01/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 01/04/2026 21:36:19 ::: P7.SL.11542.2026+.doc
10. Dr. Chandrachud has made out a case. Hence, I am inclined to issue notice to Defendants.
11. Humdast permitted. In addition to Court's notice, Applicant / Plaintiff is directed to serve the Defendants a copy of this order, Suit and Interim Application forthwith and inform about the next date of hearing by any permissible mode of service and file appropriate affidavit of service with tangible proof thereof.
12. Defendants are directed to remain present on the next adjourend date on which date the request made by Dr. Chandrachud for grant of prayer clauses (i) and (iv) shall be considered by the Court after hearing Defendants.
13. Stand over to 08th April 2026. To be placed under the caption 'First on Board'.
14. Praecipe is disposed.
H. H. SAWANT [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] Digitally signed HARSHADA by HARSHADA HANUMANT HANUMANT SAWANT SAWANT Date: 2026.04.01 17:10:58 +0530 4 of 4 ::: Uploaded on - 01/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 01/04/2026 21:36:19 :::