|
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 |
|