Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
TIRUPATI
A.S.No. 134 /2007
Between:-
K.S.V. Narasimhulu Appellant/Plaintiff
And:-
B.Sambasiva Rao Respondent/Defendant
“The term ‘person’ includes not only the physical body and members
but also every bodily sense and personal attribute among which is the
reputation a man has acquired. Reputation can also be defined as the
good name, the credit, honor and character which is derived from
favourable pubic opinion or esteem , and character of a good
reputation is a valuable privilege of ancient origin. ‘Reputation’ is an
element of personal security and is protected by the constitution
equally with the right to enjoyment of life, liberty and property.
13. In view of the admitted facts that there is a statement and there
is publication the two issues as framed by the Trial Court and
examined are:
“Whether the plaintiff entitled for recovery of Damages as pleaded;
and
To what relief?”
were all beasts and pigs in their conduct”, or to write of a man that he
has the itch, and stank of brimstone, would be defamatory.”
BURDEN OF PROOF
16. The trialCourt committed an error in placing the burden of proof
on the Appellant/Plaintiff instead of the Respondent/Defendant that
the impugned statement is made in bad faith. It is settled law that the
person who made the defamatory statement has to prove that he has
made the same in good faith and the statement is true and it is
covered by an exception under the law of Defamation.
The Trial court in para 13 of its Judgement has stated:
“However the plaintiff is not able to establish that the said statement
is made in bad faith or with a view to lower the reputation of the
plaintiff herein”
This is clearly against the provision of law.
And here are the stipulations of the Supreme Court in its 2016
Judgment(Supra)
:: 15 ::
“To constitute the offense there has to be imputation and it must have
been provided in the provision with the intention of causing harm or
having reason to believe that such imputation will harm the reputation
of the person about whom it is made. Causing harm to the reputation
of a person is the basis on which the offense is founded and mens
rea is a condition precedent to constitute the offence. The
complainant has to show that the accused had intended or known or
had reason to believe that the imputation made by him would harm
the reputation of the complainant. The criminal offence emphasizes
on the intention or harm.”
GOOD FAITH
in para 177:
“good faith and public good are both to be satisfied and failure of the
appellant to prove good faith would exclude the application of Ninth
Exception in favour of the accused.”
:: 16 ::
And
In para 178 the Court recounted from its earlier decision in Sukra
Mahto v. Basdeo Mahto and another and said
“The Court further opined that good faith and public good are
questions of fact and emphasis has been laid on making enquiry in
good faith and due care and attention for making imputation.”
Nelson’s Indian Penal Code (1966 , volume 1, page 193) quotes the
following observation relying on A Madras High Court decision , in re
Ganapathaiah Pillai A.I.R.1953 Madras , 936
“ The question of good faith is a question of fact and must be
gathered from the surrounding circumstances. Mere actual belief
without any reasonable grounds for believing is not simultaneous with
good faith. But good faith doesn’t require logical infallibility but due
care and caution which must in case be considered with reference to
the general circumstances and the capacity and intelligence of the
person whose conduct is in question.”
In the present case the Defendant is a businessman,
presumably a man of the world and as stated by him, a family man of
two grown-up children. While being a tenant in a house and on
proceeding legally in order to retain possession he has acted under
expert legal guidance and as asserted by him he has gathered
information regarding the Plaintiff’s family particulars, apart from
particulars regarding the property he is residing in. It will only be
reasonable to expect from such a responsible person due care and
attention while making a severe allegation regarding the character of
the Plaintiff. If in fact he has taken due care and attention, he ought to
have produced before this Hon’ble court relevant evidence, either
documentary or oral to substantiate his claim that he has acted in
good faith. His incapacity to produce any evidence what so ever only
categorically proves that his claim of good faith is absolutely false.
21. The trial court has totally ignored to take note of EX.A4
Presidents’ Scout Certificate received by the Plaintiff way back in
1966 while he was a high school student. Duely signed by the
erstwhile President on India Late Sri S.Radhakrishan the certificate
appreciates the dedication of the Plaintiff to the cause of the
international Scout movement. If adolescence is the age in which
:: 19 ::
23. As a journalist the Plaintiff worked for two popular Telugu news-
papers:Andhra Prabha and Andhra Jyothi. While Ex.A8 to Ex.A 11
testify his employment in Andhra Prabha Bangalore , Ex.A 12, A 13
and A 14 are the evidences regarding his serivice in Andhra Jyothi in
Tirupati. It is evident from these documents that the Plaintiff has
worked in Bangalore as journalist in Andhra Prabha for a period of
four years from 1982 to 86 and worked for Andhra Jyothi Tirupati
from 1986 onwards.
:: 20 ::
without any doubt that the plaintiff was engaged in literary and
publication activity and widely recognized in Chittoor district.
29. Exhibits A 24,A 25,A 26,A 27,A 28,A 29,A 30 and A 31are all very
popular novels written by the plaintiff and serially published in most
popular telugu weekly magazines: SWATHI WEEKLY,
ANDHRAPRABHA WEEKLY, ANDHRAJYOTHI WEEKLY. Even the
very volume of these publications running in to several hundreds of
pages and being publications in popular magazines establish that the
plaintiff was always engaged in productive literary work which was
not only giving him name and fame but also getting him high
remunerations.
30. The plaintiff humbly prays the attention of the Hon’ble court
Ex.A 32 being a bunch of 25letters submitted before the Hon’ble court
as samples of responses from readers belonging to different cross
sections of society. These letters of admiration and appreciation and
fanfare received by the plaintiff undoubtedly demonstrate the
popularity of the plaintiff in the general public.
32. The plaintiff prays for the mercy of the Hon’ble court to note the
contents of this exhibit which is a post card written to the plaintiff by
Late Vidwan Sri Korlagunta Krishnaiah which is irrefutable evidence
on the most idealistic harmonious and glorious relationship between
:: 23 ::
the plaintiff and the plaintiff’s father. It can be read in this letter that
the writer of the letter Sri.Krishnaiah was participating in programmes
in the ashram run by the plaintiff’s father which was meticulously
assisted by the plaintiff. And late Sri Krishnaiah was witness to
numerous occasions in which the plaintiff and his father shared the
same dias in conducting “DHARMIKOPANYASAM” programmes.
who is also a born sage without ambition for money and with utter
disregard for worldly affairs came forward to give assistance to the
Ashramam from 1991 and made excellent arrangements in the
matters of Ashramam and organized big functions during Aradhana
Utsawam in 1993 ,1994 and 1995 and other programmes for the
conduct of weekly-Saturday-dharmikopanyasam by beginning from
13-3-1993 and running even now without any break gave a big fillip to
the spread of the name of SUNANANANDA ASHRAMAM in tirupati
town and ooutside places and releaseof his book of poems called
SUGNANA SATAKAM which isafter the name of Sri Swamijihas
received universal acclaim in telugu literary field and above all
starting and running an elimentary school as Ashramam school in the
Ashramam premises indicating the whole hearted devotion and his
dedication to the late Swamiji and the Ashramam”
Further in Para 17 Sri Venkataswamy stated “present trustee
K.S.V. has already statutorily commenced his work as an
unregistered trustee from 1993 onwards”
In paragraph 18 Sri Venkataswamy recited “ and whereas the
said property was acquired by me for the purpose of running an
Ashramam in accordance with the noble and pious wishes of Sri
Swamiji and whereas it was maintained as an Ashramam for more
than 50 years up to my present age of about 74 years. It is my pious
wish that it should be preserved as an Ashramam and I consider that
my son is the best qualified and fit and proper person to be entrusted
with the Ashramam work, I do hereby appoint him as trustee of the
Ashramam and bequeath the same to him to maintain the same as
an ashramam as long as possible and practicable for him by
continuing the worship of Samadhi , conducting the meditating
classes in its premises , running of schools and colleges , Yoga
institutions , arranging of Dharmikopanyaasams , spreading of feeling
of brotherhood in all classes of society, uplifting of womanhood ,doing
social, spiritual and cultural activities and such other things.”
:: 25 ::
All the above recitals by the plaintiff’s father in favour of his son
are self-explanatory. Late Sri Venkataswamy was a very eminent
advocate and a person of great integrity and honour and in running
the Ashramam he was cherishing the high ideals of commemorating
the memory of his late brother, the Swamiji, and also serving
humanity for spiritual upliftment.
The very fact that he has bequeathed very valuable property with all
of its historical institutional background of over 50years to the plaintiff
establishes beyond any sort of doubt that the father had high
appreciation of the character and capabilities of the plaintiff.
The recitals reflect not only the father’s love and affection but also his
high appreciation of the commitment of the son to high ideals and
integrity in respect of performing the assigned duties.
The recitals undoubtedly show that the father had absolute trust in
the work and way of life of the son.
of the plaint are totally correct and the same is supported by the
version of the deceased wife of the plaintiff. At least some of them
comes to the Box and says that he is not of that sort, the plaintiff has
no objection to decree the suit.” Very much as a response to the
Defendant’s wager the plaintiff has lead P.W. 3 ,his cousin brother ,to
depose in this matter in the interest of justice. It is humbly submitted
before this Hon’ble court that P.W.3 is not a well-educated person
and not used to testations in courts of Justice. His statement that
“while Late Venkataswamy was alive , the plaintiff was mostly
residing at Bangalore” can only be considered to mean that the only
time the plaintiff was away from home was while he was at Banglore
by way of employment. In the light of documentary evidence exhibits
A 8, A 9, A 10 and A 11, it can clearly be seen that plaintiff was in
employment in “Andhra Prabha” at Bangalore ,for a period of four
years only and this fact can in no way be interpreted that the plaintiff
was leading a wayward life since if it were so, all employees around
the world living away from parents can be dubbed as wayward
persons and not caring for their parents.
And there is absolutely no iota of suggestion that he plaintiff was not
frequently coming down from Bangalore to Tirupati to look after his
father and family or that the father was not visiting his son at
Bangalore.
Under section 499 of the Indian Penal Code it is the intention of the
Defendant that makes the statement a defamatory statement. A
careful examination of the definition of Defamation under section 499
is essential
42. Apart from making the impugned statement in the plaint of O.S
289/2000 the Respondent/Defendant has made repetition of the
statement during his pleadings in his written statement and also his
affidavit. It is settled Law that repetition of defamatory statement can
lead to a fresh cause of action on defamation. Nelson’s Penal code
(page 2759) explains as follows :
“ A person who hears a libelous statement made
concerning another has no right to take it for granted that it is true.
The previous publication by another of defamatory words is no
justifications for their repetition. The mere fact that some such are
similar accusation against the complainant had been made by some
other person as well would not be a valid defiance for the accused.
Wrong is not to be justified or excused by wrong because one man
does an unlawful act to any person another is not permitted to do
similar act to the same person”
there were news items published regarding the death of the Plaintiff’s
wife in suspicious circumstances. And in so doing he stated that he
relied in hearsay and rumours in the society. It is settled Law that
words charging a person with having committed punishable offenses
without a justified cause is itself defamation. The unwarranted
context in which the Defendant made these imputations clearly
indicate a mind bent on causing harm to the plaintiff some way or the
other.
Nelson’s Penal Code (page 2764) explains:
“ An imputation against another person although made in the
absence of actual ill-will is not on that account to be accepted as
being made bonafide. Conscious violation of Law to another’s
prejudice is sufficient though there may be no malice in fact. When
defamatory words are prima face libelous, legal malice must be
presumed until the case of privilege is made out.”
49. While the impugned statement is designed and made part of the
pleadings in the injunction suit OS 289/200 and the cause of action
itself is fabricated to enable the Defendant to squat in the house of
the Plaintiff for as long a period as possible, the very nature attributes
of the pleadings in the said suit plaint have latent malice aimed and
calculated to show the Plaintiff here-in in low light. In fact the
Defendant has mischievously made it a point to humiliate not only the
Plaintiff here-in but also his father Sri. Koneti Venkataswamy. The
Plaintiff begs for the kind attention of the Honourable to court to the
cause title of the plaint in OS 289/2000 where- in the calling of the
Defendant K.Venkataswamy is stated only as ‘ Landlord’ and not
mentioned as Advocate. The said Venkaraswamy lived and died as
an Advocate and while at the time of instilling the said he was very
much attending his practice. Subsequent to the suit and in the month
of December 2001 Sri Venkatawamy passed away and his death was
condoled by the Tirupati Bar Association. The Defandant who claims
to have close personal acquaintance of Late Sri Venkataswamy has
committed an act of omission by ignoring the calling of Sri
Venkataswamy and described him as Landlord only in order to
humiliate him in the course of a legal proceeding.
In respect of describing the calling of the Defandant 2 that is the
Plaintiff here-in the same malicious method is adopted by the
Defendant here-in. Defendant 2 in OS 289/2000 that is
K.S.V.Narasimhulu is described as “Dependant” and not as a writer
as journalist. This is another example of the malicious intent of the
Defendant in the nature and spirit of the plaint in OS 289/2000. It is a
legal requisite that document should be read as a whole though
particular examination of the portions in question is more severe. In
Para 8 of the said plaint which contains the impugned statement, the
Defandant here-in described that “ the first defendant became totally
dependant on the second defendant and the other defendants and he
has no disposing capacity of his own due to extreme age.” By
:: 38 ::
describing that the father is depending of his son and daughters and
in the cause title itself describing the son as a “ dependant” a
calculated and designed attempt has been made to give a very
pathetic picture of both the father and son being dependants on the
daughters which altogether is false in the light of the abundant
evidence produced by the Plaintiff here-in. All this demonstration is to
explain the malicious state of mind of the Defendant in filing the suit
OS 289/2000 and particularly his calculated intention to defame the
Plaintiff in the course of a legal proceeding.
Page 161
Damages
other hand are such as the law will not infer from the nature of
the words themselves, they must therefore be specially claimed
on the pleadings and evidence of them be given at the trial.