[Case Brief] Samman Capital Ltd. v. Bhupinder Singh Rana & Ors. [I.A. 10550 of 2025 in CS(OS) 257 of 2025] [Delhi High Court]
The Civil Suit was filed by the Plaintiff against the Defendants No. 1 to 4, seeking damages and relief of injunction along with
appropriate further directions against purported defamatory statements made
by Defendant Nos.1 to 3 on the platform established and maintained by Defendant No.4.
The Interlocutory Application bearing No. 10550 of 2025 was filed by the Plaintiff herein under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 seeking Injunction against the purported acts of Defendant Nos. 1 to 3 which led to defamation on the platforms established and maintained by Defendant No.4.
The Counsel for the Plaintiff submitted that: -
- Defendant Nos.1 to 3 have posted various defamatory and derogatory material on the platform administered by Defendants No.4.
- The actions of the Defendant No. 1 to 3 was not confined only to making defamatory statements on social media platforms, but has spilled over to the point that on 11.04.2025, Defendant No. 1 to 3, pasted pictures of Directors/key managerial persons of the Plaintiff on a car bearing registration no. DL3CBN1518 Model Indigo, make Tata Motors.
- To further defame the Plaintiff, the Defendant No. 1 to 3, placed a garland of shoes around the above said pictures of the Directors/Senior Management of Plaintiff. The said Defendants also pasted print outs with derogatory and defamatory statements alleging that the Plaintiff has cheated the Defendant No. 1 to 3.
Based on the arguments advanced and submissions made by the parties, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court being conscious of the rights of the Defendants, also being conscious of the jurisprudence of freedom of expression & the bounds of lawful criticism, also after perusing the records available with it and relying upon various judgements of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court as well as the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, observed that the acts of the Defendant Nos. 1 to 3 may cause irreparable loss to the goodwill and business prospects of Plaintiff. The Hon'ble Court further observed that on the contrary, Defendant Nos.1 to 3, if restrained from
publishing or further disseminating the impugned content, are unlikely to
suffer any comparable prejudice, as no legal or reputational right of theirs
appears to be implicated in such restraint. The Hon'ble Court further observed that Defendant Nos.1 to 3 do not seem to be
engaging in any criticism, but seem to be overstepping their freedom of
expression. It was observed by the Hon'ble Court that although the Plaintiff appears to have remained acquiescent in respect
of social media posts that have been published since 2023, the present
trigger appears to be the public vehicle display, which has taken the
defamatory campaign beyond the virtual space and into a conspicuously
public spectacle.
In view of the said observations and relying upon various judgements of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court as well as the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court, prima facie allowed the Interlocutory Application bearing No. 10550 of 2025, filed by the Plaintiff with certain directions.
CASES REFERRED
- Isha Foundation v. Google LLC & Ors.
- Morgan Stanley Mutual Fund v. Kartick Das [(1994) 4 SCC 225]
- Bloomberg Television Production Services India (P) Ltd. v. Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd. [(2025) 1 SCC 741]
- Ruchi Kalra v. Slowform Media (P) Ltd. [2025 SCCOnLine Del 1894]
- CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908
COUNSEL WHO APPEARED
- Mr. Rajiv Nayar, Senior Advocate, Mr. Dayan Krishnan, Senior Advocate along with Ms. Kanika Agnihotri, Mr. Karan Luthra, Mr. Vaibhav Agnihotri and Mr. Harshit Kiran, Advocates for Plaintiff
- None for Defendants
IMPORTANT LINKS
MyLawman is now on Telegram (t.me/mylawman) Follow us for regular legal updates. Follow us on Google News, Instagram, LinkedIn, Facebook & Twitter, or join our WhatsApp Group. You can also subscribe to our Newsletter for Email Updates. MyLawman always tries to maintain the accuracy and correctness of the post. MyLawman does not take any responsibility for the accuracy of the Posts. The post has been shared as we received it from our staff and the submission form.