C.R.P67 Govt
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
WWW.LIVELAW.IN -: C.R.P67 Govt. of Karnataka Form No 9 (Chill Title Sheet for Judgments in Suits (R.P.91) TITLE SHEET FOR JUDGMENTS IN SUITS_ IN THE COURT OF THE VIII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH-15) AT BENGALURU Dated this the 26th day of April, 2019. PRESENT: Sri PATIL NAGALINGANAGOUDA, B.A.,LL.M., VIII Additional Cit} Civil and Sessions Judge (CCH-15), Bengaluru. ORIGINAL SUIT No.7217 /2013 PLAINTIFF Miss. Divya Spandana @, Ramya, D/o. Ranjeetha Mandya Boregowda, Aged about 30 years, Resident of No.102, Brigade Odyssey, Convent Road, Bangalore. (By Sri Pramod Nair, Advocate) -VERSUS- DEFENDANTS 1. Asianet News Network Private Limited, TC 26/621, Secretariat Ward, Opposite Kerala Fire and Rescues Service Head Quarters, Adjacent to Hotel Keys, Housing Board Junction, Thiruvananthpuram, Kerala - 695 001, represented by its Managing Director - Mr. Rajeev Chandrasekhar. ·::.,, varna News 24x7, ·No' ... 6, Crescent Road, Oppo ite Mallege Medical Cont'd .. WWW.LIVELAW.IN -2- O.S. No.7217/2013 Centre, Bangalore - 560 001, represented by its Editor-in-Chief Mr. Vishweshwara Bhat. (By Sri P.V.M., Advocate) -- ------------------------------------------------- Date of Institution of the Suit 28-09-2013 Nature of the Suit (Suit on Damages/ Compensation. pronote, Suit for declaration and possession, Suit for injun• ction etc,) Date of the commencement 13-08-2015 of recording of the evidence Date on which the Judgment 26-04-2019 was pronounced Year/ s Month/ s Day/ s Total duration : 5 years, 6 months, 28 days. c=::::::::-=-=-- ~. ~ . ...,,.,_~b\l{lt9]. (PATIL NAGALINGANAGOUDA) VIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru. JUDGMENT This is a suit filed by the plaintiff against the defendants for judgment and decree directing the plaintiff to pay damages to the tune of Rs.10,00,00,000 /- and to grant permanent injunction \ restraining the defend ts :'.frbm· t~\ casting any such &,- pfogramme which rliit~kfthe plainti;;,J;_\ out any proof .-- . -~,., Cont'd .. ' .. •.• • # ·,,~· WWW.LIVELAW.IN -3- O.S.No.7217/2013 directly, indirectly or m any manner whatsoever to match fixing/ spot fixing scandal or any such other criminal activity. 2. The brief facts of the plaint are as under - Plaintiff has contended she is a member of Indian Parliament, a leading actress primarily in Kannada movies and is a resident of Bangalore. It is contended defendant No. I is the leading news network companies and is headed by Mr. Rajeev Chandrasekhar and defendant No.2 is one of the leading Kannada regional news channels having vast viewership all over the State of Karnataka and even outside the State and is controlled by defendant No. l. It is contended present suit is filed for damages as the defendants have caused to the plaintiff immense loss of reputation, social stigma, mental harassment, agony and career harm by falsely and repeatedly suggesting in public broadcasts that the plaintiff was involved in the infamous incidents of spot fixing in relation to the ~ndian ·P.remier League's .,...Twenty20 cricket cham~rria;t ,,.,,s. r-: ,· ''r .......'. · . .... I . ' ..,, .I I • ~-:.- • - I ! ·~~ Cont'd .. WWW.LIVELAW.IN - 4 - O.S. No.7217/2013 It is contended plaintiffs family enjoys and commands very high respect in the society and the plaintiff is a leading actor in South Indian film industry. She is also one of the most successful actresses in the Kannada film industry with around a decade of experience in acting in w ell-acclaimed and successful films. It is contended plaintiffs acting career commenced in the year 2003 with a Kannada film by name 'Abhi' and she has also acted in another Kannada film 'Excuse Me' which was also yet another commercial success. It is contended plaintiffs acting career is not restricted to the Kannada film industry alone as she has also acted in Tamil and Telugu movies and has received acclaim and appreciation even outside the Kannada film industry. It is contended plaintiff was actively involved in the election campaign for few contestants at the recently held elections to the State Assembly of Karnataka and she enjoyed immense reputation amongst the general public. It is contended she has Cont'd .. WWW.LIVELAW.IN -5- O.S. No.7217/2013 desired woman in the Kannada film industry in a poll conducted by the Times of India Group. It is contended plaintiff has been associated as the Brand Ambassador of several brands like Bajaj, IPL Royal Challengers, Bangalore; Tata Salt; Milk Route etc. It is contended she was brand ambassador for the team of Royal Challengers, Bangalore for seasons one to five of IPL's Twenty20 Cricket Championship matches. During such seasons, the plaintiff as part of her contract was regularly present at the Stadium during the matches and also occasionally at other functions/ shows/ events arranged by the organizers or by the team Royal Challengers, Bangalore. It lS contended cause of action for instituting the present matter arose pursuant to the Delhi police arresting 3 prominent cricketers belonging Lo one team on 16-05- 2013 owing to their suspected involvement in incidents of spot fixing, the illegal activity of fixing a part of a cricket match as per illegal arrangements reached with the bookies and agents associated-with the prohibited /... ··· r . ' k - /betting activities. It is /~nte'nded. on 30 I ·.' I I Cont'd .. ' ' WWW.LIVELAW.IN - 6 - O.S. No.7217/2013 section of the Media including the print media and electronic media telecast news that Mr. Sahu had allegedly claimed that the two Kannada actresses were involved in betting and spot fixing by way of acting as the link with the players. Tt is contended plaintiff has been informed that a few newspapers and electronic media thereafter published some news items specifically pointing fingers at some Kannada actresses who could possibly be under the shadow of suspicion. It is contended m the above said document, defendants motivated by reasons 'urikriow n to the plaintiff started unleashing grossly defamatory and offensively insinuating telecast against the plaintiff which form the cause of action for the present matter. It is contended on 30-05-2013 at 7:00 p.m., defendant No.2 carried a news report telecast on the alleged involvement of some Kannada film actresses in the betting and spot fixing scandal. However, while doing so, most shockingly the photos and videos of the \ plaintiff were broadcast- th~r~~y actively suggesting r: ~---..,,. that she was one arnorig-rfhe persons .. :} ~ / .\~ I C~ I · ~ r ,. \ ~ I i :- • I '- '\. II -· Cont'd .. I \ ·---- WWW.LIVELAW.IN -7- O.S. No.7217/2013 film industry who had allegedly been involved in the scandal. On the next day 1.e., on 31-05-2013, the defendant No.2 transmitted another program named 'Betting Raaniyaru' (Betting Queens). In the introductory part to this program, the plaintiff was shown in relation to various events related to Royal Challengers, Bangalore and TPL. The anchor of the program/background voice made various suggestive remarks about the plaintiff being present at the matches and the events related thereto. The anchor thereafter referred to the alleged involvement of some Kannada actresses in spot fixing and the TV screen at this point displayed the caption 'Betting Raaniyaru' and immediately thereafter displayed pictures of the plaintiff at the stadium viewing matches and cheering her team. It is contended various captions as under were also shown with the picture of the plaintiff constantly being beamed at the background - a) 'Night Partygalalli kanisikonda sandalwood queen' ( seen Sandalwood Queen); Cont'd .. I • • ~ WWW.LIVELAW.IN - 8 - O.S. No.7217 /2013 b) 'Betting raaniyaru' (betting queens) 'bettingnalli kannadada gombegalu' (Kannada dolls in betting), c) 'Link agent aagi kelasa maaduthiruva natiyaru' (actresses working as link agents), d) 'Aa natimaniyaru yaaru gotta' (do you know who those actresses are), e) 'Partygalalli kaanisikondiddalu aa cheluve ' (seen in parties, that beauty), f) 'Bettingnalli trikona mukhada sundari' (triangle faced beauty in betting), g) 'Sandalwoodnallu avaribbara mele anumana' (suspicion in Sandalwood on those two), h) 'IPL spot fixingnalli kannadada natiyaru ' (Kannada actresses in IPL spot fixing), i) 'IPL partygalalli kaanisikonda Ramya ' (Ram ya seen in IPL parties). It is contended the imputation also conveyed the false impression that the plaintiff was actively involved in Season 6 of the IPL, ,~~e~as} · was not factually .... ,., true. Plaintiff was not actively associate with Season 6 1 , . .. '-' '\ • 'I .."• • -1,. '·r ? • ·:;~ Cont'd .. ~..- - .>: WWW.LIVELAW.IN - 9- O.S. No.7217/2013 of the IPL Championship since she was actively involved in the campaigning for the Jegislative assembly elections being held in the State of Karnataka. It is contended except for having gone to the cricket stadium in Banga1ore on one occasion upon being invited by the organizers for a cause (Green Match) to sign the cricket ba11 to be presented to a lucky \\ inner, the plaintiff had not even entered the stadium during Season 6 of the IPL matches. It is contended even on the day when she visited on invitation as aforesaid, she was hardly present for about 30 minutes at the stadium. By telecasting the pictures/photos/videos of the plaintiff that belonged to the previous seasons of the IPL matches, the defendant No.2 went to the extent of falsely conveying to the viewers that the plaintiff used to be regularly seen at the stadiums cheering for Royal Cha1lengers, Bangalore during Season 6 of the IPL matches. It is contended a DVD of the defamatory program telecasted by the defendant No.2 on 31-05- 2013 is produced and still images captured from the said program are also pro »> . :,. \ \ .• \ t .... \ \ \.t. : J . I ·. I ·./ Cont'd .. / WWW.LIVELAW.IN - 10- O.S. No.7217/2013 It is contended by falsely suggesting that she was involved in spot fixing, the defendants have caused the plaintiff immense loss of pride, loss of reputation, mental agony and harassment to the plaintiff.