Reckitt Benckiser (India) Private ... vs Itc Limited
Associated Newspapers Limited, 2005 (1) All.ER 30, where it
was held that if it is a known fact that the truth of defamation
Page 45/95
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
O.S.A.(CAD).Nos.98 to 100 of 2021
claims can only be tested at trial level then it would be
appropriate for the Court not to award an interim injunction to
the plaintiffs, as the other course would otherwise put an
unreasonable burden on the concept of free speech. It was urged
in addition, that the rule of caution enunciated in Bonnard
(supra) has been approved and followed, by a Division Bench of
this Court, in Khushwant Singh v. Maneka Gandhi, AIR 2002
Del 58. Learned counsel urged that this Court should also be
mindful of the fact that the present suit, is an instance of a
SLAPP SUIT, the sole objective of which is the plaintiff's desire
to muffle or stifle criticisms about the ecological damage
threatened by the Dhamra Port Project. It was argued that though
the Port is a joint venture, the real beneficiary after it comes up,
is the Tata group, as it (the port) affords a proximate sailing
point from which their products, such as steel, etc. can be
shipped.