H.D.Devegowda vs M/s. Nandi Infrastructure Corridor Enterprise Limited. Writ Petition 725/2021 decided on 15 January 2021.
Judgment Link: http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/358443/1/WP725-21-15-01-2021.pdf
Relevant paragraphs: 2(a) The suit was filed by the respondent on 27.06.2012; it is founded on alleged defamation; plaintiff claims the damages in a sum of Rupees Ten Crore; Written Statement has been filed on 13.08.2012 resisting the suit; issues have been framed years ago; plaintiff’s evidence was completed on 06.02.2019; matter was posted to 26.02.2019 for the defence evidence; however, petitioner & his counsel remained absent and therefore, his evidence being taken as nil, case was posted for arguments.
2 (c) ….The opinion of the learned judge that the petitioner has been dragging on the suit proceeding is formed on the basis of what has been reflected in the Order Sheet; there is no reason to doubt the same; in matters like this, a Writ court cannot run a race of opinions with learned judges of the Courts below. When the suit was posted for arguments, about a year thereafter the subject applications are moved once again, for reopening the suit stage; no affidavit of the petitioner is filed in support thereof nor any reason is assigned for not filing one. The explanation offered by the advocate on record as above on behalf of the petitioner for not availing the umpteen opportunities earlier granted for leading defence evidence is hardly plausible, to say the least.
2(d) The suits founded on the tort of defamation need to be tried as expeditiously as possible; reputation, be it personal or occupational, for any person is sacrosanct; the Apex Court has ruled that, the right to reputation is a facet of Article 21 of the Constitution of India; the public memory being too short to be little, the claim for redressal for the hurt of reputation merits speedier consideration and ideally speaking, before the public memory fades; in defamation suits, award of damages in terms of money hardly constitutes a full recompense for the injury suffered; delayed justice makes it still worse; this is an added reason for the speedy trial of such suits; they cannot be allowed to be dragged on indefinitely; this inarticulate premise having animated the decision of the learned trial judge, impugned order is not vulnerable for challenge.
(e) The impugned order cannot be faltered for yet another reason too; learned judge of the Court below having exercised his discretion in accordance with rules of reason & justice, has made the impugned order the kind of which does not merit a deeper examination at the hands of a Writ Court exercising a limited supervisory jurisdiction constitutionally vested in it by Article 227, vide SADHANA LODH Vs. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., & ANOTHER, (2003) 3 SCC 524.
In the above circumstances, this writ petition being devoid of merits, is liable to be rejected in limine and accordingly, it is.
Compiled by S. Basavaraj, Advocate, Daksha Legal.
Daksha Legal 