Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 77 (0.68 seconds)
Documents citing Ram Jethmalani vs Subramaniam Swamy on 3 January, 2006

Sh. Pankaj Aggarwal vs Dheeraj Sharma on 7 February, 2020

In Ram Jethmalani vs. Subramaniam Swami (Supra) it was observed that a statement against a person that he has been receiving money from LTTE is ex facie defamatory. The authorities as relied upon by revisionist are not helpful in the facts and circumstances of the present case. I do not find any illegality or impropriety in C.R. No.59/19 Pankaj Aggarwal vs. Dheeraj Sharma & Anr. Page 7/8 the impugned order passed by Ld.Trial Court. Accordingly, revision petition stands dismissed. Trial Court record be sent back alongwith a copy of this order. Revision file be consigned to Record Room.
Delhi District Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Rajesh vs Deepti on 23 February, 2024

11.1.21 . The plaintiff neither in his pleadings nor during his course of evidence disclosed his income. However, during his cross examination he deposed that he is not an income tax assesse. The plaintiff in fact made no attempt to establish that after the plaintiff filed the Petition u/s 6 of The Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 containing the defamatory remarks, the earnings of the defendant suffered a dip. In fact, the plaintiff did not lead any evidence in terms of the mental agony so pleaded. It appears that the plaintiff merely speculated the quantum of damages to Rs. 3,00,000/-. At this juncture, it is relevant to mention the case decided by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Ram Jeithmalani v. Subramaniam Swamy decided on 03.01.2006, AIR 2006 Delhi 300, wherein it was observed ".........Damages awarded are recompense to the loss of honour and reputation.
Delhi District Court Cites 9 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Shri D.V. Singh vs Mrs. Usha Jain on 28 January, 2017

27.Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff has also referred to para 67 of the judgment titled Ram Jethmalani vs. Subramaniam Swami (Supra)  and argued that the allegations made in the reply before the Registrar of Cooperative Society are irrelevant and scandalous being unrelated to the proceedings and thus, the same   anyways   are   not   absolutely   privileged   communication.   Relevant paragraphs no. 67 & 68 are reproduced hereunder as : ­  "67. Even the issue of absolute privilege has remained a subject   matter   of   considerable   debate.   Is   absolute privilege absolute in the sense of being infinite?
Delhi District Court Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Rieva Bhalla vs Stae on 20 August, 2011

This situation remained static up to 2006 when in Ram Jeth Malani's case in another obiter Hon'ble Delhi High Court concluded that the Absolute Privilege in Civil defamation is not absolute or infinite. This judgment was an obiter because it pertained to a defamation committed under Commission of Inquiries Act which is not on the same footings as a judicial proceedings.
Delhi District Court Cites 14 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next