T.S.NANAVATI Advocate A-306, Sujal Apartments, Ramdevnagar, Satellite Road, Ahmedabad Phone: , Mobile:

Similar documents
* HIGH COURT OF DELHI : NEW DELHI. + I.A. Nos /2007 & 5651/2009 in CS(OS) No. 829/2002

THE INDIAN PENAL CODE (AMENDMENT) BILL, 2016

The Libel and Slander Act

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + ARB.A. 5/2015 & IA 2340/2015 (for stay) versus

The Libel and Slander Act

Liability of Broadcasters

Case: 3:11-cv TMR Doc #: 1 Filed: 11/07/11 Page: 1 of 13 PAGEID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION

PLEASE NOTE. For more information concerning the history of this Act, please see the Table of Public Acts.

c 237 Libel and Slander Act

1. Under what theory, or theories, if any, might Patty bring an action against Darby? Discuss.

Measures for Expediting Patent Examination in India. By Dr. Rajeshkumar H. Acharya

BROADCASTING CONTENT COMPLAINTS REDRESSAL MECHANISM

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR PARTITION. Judgment pronounced on: I.A. No.4998/2012 in CS(OS) No.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Date of Decision : December 3, 2012 CS(OS) 1785/2010

$~12 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Date of Decision : 21 st August, 2015 CM(M) 208/2015

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Date of decision:1 st December, 2009 M/S ANSAL PROPERTIES & INFRASTRUCTURE. Versus

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. AA No.396/2007. Date of decision: December 3, Vs.

Bar & Bench (

(d) an amplifier or loudspeaker transmitting a tape recording or other recording;

THE COMPETITION (AMENDMENT) BILL, 2007

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. SUBJECT : Code of Criminal Procedure, CRIMINAL M C No 5094 of 2006 and Crl M A 1088/2002

FORMAT OF BANK GUARANTEE AGAINST BID SECURITY, ADVANCE PAYMENT, SECURITY CUM PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE BID SECURITY (EMD) FORM

THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Judgment delivered on: versus

Intelligent Communication Systems India Ltd. (ICSIL) TENDER NO: F.1 (ICSIL)/01/217/ 1D Barcode Reader Tis Hazari Court/ , Dated:

1. Consider standing 2. Consider the three elements to make out a prima facie case 3. Consider defences 4. Consider remedies

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE W.P.(C) 6034/2013 DATE OF DECISION :

K.K. MISHRA.APPELLANT(S) VERSUS JUDGMENT. 2. By the order impugned, the High Court. of Madhya Pradesh has negatived the challenge

Terms and Conditions for participating in SAB Se Anokhi Family Awards Contest

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. versus

AGREEMENT FOR THE GRANT OF BIS LICENCE (FOR USE BY THE FOREIGN MANUFACTURER)

Answer A to Question Statements of Opinion May Be Actionable in a Defamation Action

PLAINTIFF S ORIGINAL PETITION

FIJI ISLANDS HIGH COURT ACT (CHAPTER 13) HIGH COURT (AMENDMENT) RULES 1998

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + W.P. (Criminal) No.801 of 2008 & C.M. Appl. No.7496 of 2008 % Versus

THE COMPETITION (AMENDMENT) BILL, 2007

IN THE UNITED STATES FEDERAL COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

SUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON FOR KING COUNTY

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SERVICE MATTER ARB P. 180/2003. Judgment delivered on: versus

CHAPTER 06:01 ARBITRATION

AGREEMENT FOR THE GRANT OF BIS LICENCE (FOR USE BY THE FOREIGN MANUFACTURER) (On Rs. 100=00 non judicial stamp paper, to be attested by Notary Public)

THE INDIAN MEDICAL COUNCIL RULES, 1957(1)

DEFAMATION. 5. A statement is not defamatory unless it has caused or is likely to cause serious financial loss to a person (s.1 of the 2013 Act).

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT. Date of Decision: CRL.A of 2013.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 5 CASE NO.: Appeal (crl.) 688 of 2001 Special Leave Petition (crl.

CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW J U D G M E N T

K.S.Gita vs Vision Time India Pvt. Ltd on 16 February, all appeals

ORDER OF THE GRIEVANCE REDRESSAL AUTHORITY, MADHYA PRADESH ORDER OF 11 SEPTEMBER 2004

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/21/2013 INDEX NO /2013 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/21/2013

Topic 1: Freedom of Speech.

Copyright Juta & Company Limited

CREDIT FACILITY AGREEMENT (FORM FOR BG LIMIT SANCTIONED) BY Insert the name of the Borrower IN FAVOUR OF THE SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD

$~28 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 15 th February, CS(OS) 3324/2014

No:532/Z/17/11/ /10/2014 RE-TENDER NOTICE FOR REMOVAL OF NON BIO MEDICAL WASTE

NOW IT IS AGREED BETWEEN THE PARTIES HERETO AS FOLLOW:

We would welcome responses to the following questions set out in the consultation paper. You can return this questionnaire by to

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Judgment delivered on: C.S. (COMM) 334/2016, IA No. 4525/2016 & 6625/2016

Contempt of Court Ordinance's text

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. W.P.(C) No.3245/2002 and CM No.11982/06, 761/07. Date of Decision: 6th August, 2008.

Defamation and Social Media An Update

$~28 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. versus. % Date of Decision: 06 th November, 2017 J U D G M E N T

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

AGREEMENT. This Agreement is made at Delhi this day of 2016 BETWEEN

Courthouse News Service

AIR(SC) 5384; ; JLJR(SC) 131; MPWN(SC) 138; ; SCC

THE COMMERCIAL COURTS, COMMERCIAL DIVISION AND COMMERCIAL APPELLATE DIVISION OF HIGH COURTS (AMENDMENT) BILL, 2018

ACT. (English text signed by the State President) (Assented to 5th April, 1965) ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS DEFINITIONS

The First Amendment & Freedom of Expression

Through Mr. A.K. Vali, Mr. Baldev Malik, Advocates for the UOI. Mr. R.M. Tiwari, Advocate for the Interpol.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN COMPANIES ACT, 1956 Date of Judgment: W.P.(C) 8432/2011

Circular to all trading and clearing members of the Exchange

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Through CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA O R D E R

Case 1:17-cv XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/06/2017 Page 1 of 19 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

THE WHISTLE BLOWERS PROTECTION ACT, 2014 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. FAO (OS) No.48/2004. Reserved on: Date of decision:

The Defamation of Directors & How to Deal With Abusive Members

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION IN THE MATTER OF COMPANIES ACT, 1956 AND

Submission by Council of The Bar of Ireland to the Department of Justice and Equality for the Review of the Defamation Act, 2009

An Act to modify the general law relating to the tort of defamation and for other purposes.

DEFAMATION INSTRUCTIONS Introduction

The Libel and Slander Act

Bar and Bench (

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 05/15/ :39 PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/15/2015

$~8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON : OCTOBER 12, versus CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P GARG, J.

Minnesota No-Fault, Comprehensive or Collisions Damage Automobile Insurance Arbitration RULES

IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS IN THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN AND FOR KENT COUNTY

CRIMINAL DEFAMATION AN AID TO PROTECT ONE S DIGNITY

Vibrant India. Volume- 1 Number- XXIII

TENDER DOCUMENT FOR ANNUAL SOFTWARE SUBSCRIPTION AND SUPPORT RENEWAL FOR IBM LOTUS DOMINO LICENSES

TENDER DOCUMENT FOR RECEPTIONIST REGIONAL MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY,BHOPAL

DECRIMINALIZATION OF DEFAMATION: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. CS(OS)No.1307/2006. Date of decision:16th January, 2009

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO 960 OF 2018 (UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA) VERSES

COMMERCIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS

$~22. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. versus

Through: Mr. Himansu Upadhyay, Mr. J.P. Sahrawat and Mr. Shivam Tripathi, Advs. CORAM: HON BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT

CHAPTER XVIII. Procedure in Financial Matters. (a) The Budget

THE DELIMITATION ACT, 2002 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS

The First Amendment & Freedom of Expression

FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 09/03/ :48 PM INDEX NO /2014 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/04/2014

Transcription:

T.S.NANAVATI Advocate A-306, Sujal Apartments, Ramdevnagar, Satellite Road, Ahmedabad 380 015. Phone: 26928557, 26928872 Mobile: 9825009021 Ms. Medha Patkar, Narmada Bachao Andolan, 62, Mahatma Gandhi Marg, Badwani M.P. BY REGISTERED POST A/D. Sub: Last and Final Notice. Madam, 29 th April, 2006 Under instructions of my client Shri V.K. Saxena, President, National Council for Civil Liberties, having its office at 401, Vraj Avenue, Swastik Society, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad having produced the relevant files, material and documents with instructions to cause to issue this last and final notice as under: - 1. This notice is directed against the following utterances made at your end during the course of the interview which came to be telecasted by INDIA TV on 20-4-2006 and had received wide broadcast coverage under its programme captioned BREAKING NEWS, which came to be subsequently repetitively telecasted. V K Saxena naam ke ek aadmi ne kuch saalon pehle akhbaro mein akhbaro mein hamare khilaf aadha aadha panne ke vigyapan diye thay purane patrakaar hain unko maloom hoga. 2000 saal mein unke khilaf hamne delhi ke court mein badnami ka dava lagaya hai jo abhi tak chal raha hai. Lekin V K Saxena ne naam liya National Council of Civil Liberties ka aur unhe contracts mile Sardar Sarovar Nigam se Civil ke civil

contracts mile sardar Sarovar ke sambandhit. Main iske baad CD lekar aapke samne kabhi bhi sabit karne ke liye tayyar hoon. (Emphasis supplied) 2. You have made a claim therein that you are in possession of a C.D. purportedly said to be containing the proof of the averments made hereinabove. My client at the first instance, call upon you to forthwith provide the true copy of the said C.D. to be dispatched to my client within 48 hours of receipt of this notice failing which my client shall have reasons to believe that the averment made in respect thereof your said telecasted interview is a false claim and that no such C.D. is lying in your possession and obviously therefore there exists no proof or truth in the averments made in the said telecasted interview more particularly in respect of the existence of any such C.D. said to be containing any such proof as alleged and hence therefore obviously adverse inference shall be drawn against you for non supply of such C.D. and making of such loose averments without weighing the seriousness of the allegations contained in respect thereof. 3. My client shall be at liberty to address a further and a fuller notice appropriately dealing with the contents of the said C.D. after the supply of the same and this notice is for the present based upon the averments made in the televised interview telecasted on 20-4-2006 on INDIA TV in their programme BREAKING NEWS. 4. It is stated that the de hors the contents of the said C.D. my clients state that the above said allegations captioned in para 1 hereinabove, are per se false and defamatory, knowing the same to be false and having been spoken which it being known to be televised and telecasted through a reputed channel not only in India but also around the Globe having made such publication of imputation concerning my client intending to harm and knowing and having reason to believe that such

acts of omission and commission tantamounting to defamation as defined under Sec.499 of the Indian Penal Code. 5. At the first instance, your averment that Dava (Suit) of the year 2000 in respect of the defamation case filed at your instance against my client before the Court at Delhi is a false statement in as much as till this date my clients have not received any copy of any plaint of any suit filed in respect of any defamation whatsoever till this date. And in the event if you referred to the filing of the Criminal Complaint under Sec.500 IPC against my client in the Metropolitan Court, Patiala House New Delhi then even in that case the averment that the same is pending is false to your knowledge as the same has been stood dismissed by order dated 17-04-2003. Hence, your averment that any such defamation case is yet pending against my client is per se false and defamatory to your knowledge, knowing fully well that the same has stood dismissed. Your intent in making the false averment in stating that the same being pending was to throw a taint and cast a slur on the body, mind and reputation of my client, who stood discharged as such complaint having stood dismissed. Having made such publication of imputation concerning my client intending to harm and knowing and having reason to believe that such acts of omission and commission tantamounting to defamation as defined under Sec.499 of the Indian Penal Code. 6. You are hereby forthwith called upon to tender a public apology and publicly withdraw such statements by publication thereof through the same media in a statement in writing and/or in person within 48 hours of receipt of this notice. 7. You have further made a false and a defamatory statement inter alia imputing directly in the name of my client Mr. Saxena as well as the National Council for Civil Liberties, stating that my clients as well as the National Council of Civil Liberties

have been beneficiaries of having received the largess of awarding of Civil Contracts from the Sardar Sarovar Nigam and in relation to the Sardar Sarovar Project. 8. At the outset, my client vehemently denies every content of yours such allegation averment and aspersion and specifically state that the same are false, and non-existent. It is specifically stated that my client either in individual capacity much less the organization being the National Council for Civil Liberties of which my client is a President has ever been the recipient of any contract connected in any manner with the Sardar Sarovar Project being a civil contract awarded by the Sardar Sarovar Nigam or otherwise. You are hereby forthwith called upon to substantiate the existence of any iota of truth in the averment, allegation and aspersion cast upon the reputation of my client of espousing the cause, against the Narmada Bachao Andolan, as being the beneficiary of civil contracts from Sardar Sarovar Nigam in relation to Sardar Sarovar Project. It is stated that the allegations made therein are per-se false, non-existent and are defamatory and having made such publication of imputation concerning my client intending to harm and knowing and having reason to believe that such acts of omission and commission tantamounting to defamation as defined under section 499 of the Indian Penal Code. 9. You are hereby forthwith called upon to provide all material, documents lying in your possession to substantiate the said allegation within 48 hours of receipt of this notice, failing which it shall be presumed that you are not in possession of any of them an that adverse inference shall be required to be drawn against you having made such baseless and reckless allegation made against my client. 10. You are hereby forthwith called upon to tender a public apology and publicly withdraw such statements by publication thereof through the same

media in a statement in writing and/or in person within 48 hours of receipt of this notice in the above regard too. 11. Please note that failure to comply to the legal requisitions as called upon under this notice shall compel my clients to initiate appropriate proceedings in the Court of competent jurisdiction both the civil and/or criminal before all such courts where causes of action has simultaneously accrued in view of the facts that the televised interview was telecasted and had received wide public coverage not only in India but across the globe. Needless to state the same shall be at your risks, costs and consequences for which you are wholly and solely responsible and liable. 12. As at this stage, as my clients have called upon you to forthwith supply the C.D. in respect of which you have stated that mein iske baad CD lekar aapke samne kabhi bhi sabit karne ke liye tayyar hoon as a proof of your alleged allegations and as my clients have called upon you to substantiate the allegations made in your said statement and as this notice though being last and final notice for all purposes this notice is an interim notice subject to issuance of further detail notice after supply of better particulars and substantiation of the alleged allegations made at you end, with any documents or material if so available at your end upon which my clients shall appropriately make a claim towards the libel, slander, defamation by preferring an appropriate suit for damages before all such competent courts where such cause of action and/or part of cause of action has arisen and/or is likely to arise. 13. As this notice is caused to be issued for reasons of delay, default and negligence solely attributable at your end and hence notice charges being Rs.3,500 shall also be liable to pay to my clients, which please note. (T S Nanavati) Advocate