Indu Dalmia & Ors v. Rajasekhar Naidu Galla & Ors

RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J. JANUARY 09, 2020 'ak'..

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision: 9th January, 2020 + CS(OS) 383/2018 INDU DALMIA & ORS. ..... Plaintiffs Through: Mr. Shailender Dahiya, Adv. Versus RAJASEKHAR NAIDU GALLA & ORS. ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Harsh Singhal & Mr. Sanjay Jha, Advs. for Mr. G.V.R.Choudhary, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW 1. The three plaintiffs, namely (i) Indu Dalmia, (ii) Surendra Sharma, and (iii) M/s Dalmia Resorts International Pvt. Ltd., instituted this suit against the four defendants, namely (a) Rajasekhar Naidu Galla, (b) Mirapakayala Parthasarathi, (c) Siddala Ravi Babu and (d) Kakarla Roopesh, for recovery of Rs.10,00,00,000/- on account of compensation/damages for defamation along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum pendente lite and future. 2. I may however note that though in the prayer paragraph the claim for Rs.10,00,00,000/- is made for defamation only but in title to the plaint the suit is described as: "SUIT FOR DAMAGES OF RS.10,00,00,000/- (RUPEES TEN CRORES) ALONG WITH PENDENTELITE AND FUTURE INTEREST @ 12% PER ANNUM FOR MELICIOUS PROSECUTION, DEFAMATION AND HARASSMENT ETC." 3. The suit came up first before this Court on 3rd August, 2018 when summons thereof were ordered to be issued. The defendants, after being served, made appearance through counsel on 25th October, 2018 but failed to file their response and vide order dated 29th April, 2019 the right of the defendants to file written statement was closed and by subsequent order dated 1st August, 2019 the plaintiffs relegated to lead evidence. 4. The plaintiffs filed affidavits by way of examination-in-chief of plaintiff no.1 and plaintiff no.2 as PW1 and PW2 and of (a) Madan Singh Negi as PW3, (b) Sachita Nand Chamola as PW4 and (c) Abhishek Sharma as PW5 and on 28th November, 2019 stated that the plaintiffs do not want to examine any other witness. The evidence of the plaintiffs was closed vide order dated 28th November, 2019. 5. I may notice that neither the Joint Registrar granted an opportunity to the witnesses of the plaintiff whose affidavit by way of examination-in-chief were filed, to appear before this Court and tender the said affidavits in evidence nor did counsel for the plaintiffs seek any opportunity therefor. The affidavits by way of examination-in-chief filed, having not been tendered in evidence, resultantly there is no evidence before the Court. I may also mention that even if the right of the defendants to file written statement is closed, the defendants still have to have an opportunity to cross- examine the witnesses of the plaintiffs with respect to their depositions, though not on the defence, if any of the defendants. Reference in this respect may be made to Babbar Sewing Machine Company Vs. Trilok Nath Mahajan (1978) 4 SCC 188, Modula India Vs. Kamakshya Singh Deo (1988) 4 SCC 619, Dev Chander Sood Vs. H.L. Sud 2014 SCC OnLine Del 3716, Harikishan Vedprakash Agarwal Vs. Bujor Joshi MANU/MH/0754/2015, Basalingappa Chinnappa Goudar Vs. Shantavva 2001 SCC OnLine Kar 485, Ganpant Chand Vs. Jeth Mal 1982 SCC OnLine Raj 50, Chuni Lal Chowdry Vs. Bank of Baroda 1981 SCC OnLine J&K 9, Siai Sinha Vs. Shivadhari Sinha 1971 SCC OnLine Pat 22. Though the defence of the defendants has been struck off but the counsel for the defendants has been appearing and appeared today also. 6. The suit is listed today, for final hearing. 7. Before lunch, Mr. Harsh Singhal Advocate for the defendants mentioned the matter for adjournment but which was denied. Now after lunch, Mr. Harsh Singhal, Advocate has not appeared and has sent Mr. Sanjay Jha, Advocate who again requests for adjournment. However, there being no ground for adjournment, adjournment is again denied. 8. The counsel for the plaintiffs has been heard and the need to give an opportunity to the plaintiffs to rectify the flaw/defect aforesaid of non- tendering of affidavits by way of examination-in-chief in evidence, is not felt. 9. The pleaded case of the