Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Friday, July 13, 2001

Front Page | National | Southern States | Other States | International | Opinion | Business | Sport | Entertainment | Miscellaneous | Features | Classifieds | Employment | Index | Home

National | Previous | Next

Appeal against Madras HC order dismissed

By T. Padmanabha Rao

NEW DELHI, JULY 12. ``If a firm is described in a publication as carrying on an offensive trade, every working partner of the firm could reasonably be expected to feel aggrieved by it'', the Supreme Court has ruled.

``If the K.J. Hospital (in Chennai) is a private limited company, it is too far-fetched to rule out any one of its directors feeling aggrieved on account of pejoratives hurled at the company'', the bench observed.

Delivering the judgment, Mr. Justice K.T. Thomas dismissed a criminal appeal by special leave from Mr. John Thomas, editor and publisher of an English daily Madras Times (appellant) against an order of the Madras High Court which directed a Chennai Magistrate (trial court) to proceed with the trial of the appellant (accused) on a complaint of `defamation' from Dr. K. Jagadeesan, director of the K.J. Hospital (respondent).

The grievance in the complaint was that a news item was published by the newspaper on March 21, 1991 ``containing highly defamatory imputations against his hospital.'' ``The hospital has been caricatured in a newspaper as the abattoir of human kidneys for trafficking purposes'', the bench said.

When the director of the hospital complained of `defamation' before the trial court, the publisher of the newspaper sought shelter under the umbrage that the libel was ``not against the director personally'', but against the hospital and hence he could not feel aggrieved.

The trial magistrate by his order dated February 10, 1995, discharged Mr. John Thomas on the ground that the Dr. K. Jagadeesan had failed to prove that he had the locus standi in filing the complaint against him (the appellant).

Later, the Madras High Court, on a petition from Dr. K. Jagadeesan, disapproved of the action of the Magistrate and directed the trial to proceed.

The bench, which included Mr. Justice R.P. Sethi, observed that ``If a company is described as engaging itself in nefarious activities its impact would certainly fall on every director of the company and hence he can legitimately feel the pinch of it.''

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail


Section  : National
Previous : SC quashes FIR against Kerala Minister
Next     : Microsoft unshackles the desktop

Front Page | National | Southern States | Other States | International | Opinion | Business | Sport | Entertainment | Miscellaneous | Features | Classifieds | Employment | Index | Home

Copyrights © 2001 The Hindu

Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu