CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, PATNA

LAW OF DRAFTING PROJECT

ON:

SUITS RELATING TO DEFAMATION

SUBMITTED TO: DR. B.R.N. SHARMA

SUBMITTED BY: SAURABH SUNNY

ROLL-1230

SEC- B

8th SEMESTER; 4thYEAR

1|Page
 CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

It is my privilege to express my deep sense of respect and heartfelt gratitude

towards DR. B.R.N. SHARMA, Faculty for LAW OF DRAFTING,
PLEADINGS & CONVEYANCING, Chanakya National Law University for
his meticulous supervision and learned suggestions. I am also thankful to the
whole Chanakya National Law University family that provided me all the
material I required for the project. I would also like to thank my parents without
whose blessings the completion of this project was not possible.

The present project on SUITS RELATING TO DEFAMATION has

been able to get its final shape with the support and help of people from various
quarters. My sincere thanks go to all the members without whom the study
could not have come to its present state. I am proud to acknowledge gratitude to
the individuals during my study and without whom the study may not be
completed. I have taken this opportunity to thank those who genuinely helped
me.
SAURABH SUNNY
ROLL –1230.

2|Page
 CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

RESEARCH- METHODOLOGY

 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES:

The objective of this research work is to do a detail study on the topic “Suits relating to
defamation”.

 METHOD OF RESEARCH
The researcher has adopted a purely doctrinal method of research. The researcher has made
extensive use of the library at the Chanakya National Law University and also the internet
sources.

 SOURCES OF DATA:
The following secondary sources of data have been used in the project-
1. Textbooks.
2. Websites.
3. Articles.

 METHOD OF WRITING:
The method of writing followed in the course of this research paper is primarily analytical.

 MODE OF CITATION:
The researcher has followed a uniform mode of citation throughout the course of this research
paper.

3|Page
 CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

CONTENTS

CHAPTERS PAGE NO.

1) INTRODUCTION 5

2) TYPES OF DEFAMATION 6-7

3) RIGHT TO SUE & GENERAL RULES 8-9

4) DEFENCES AVAILABLE FOR DEFAMATION. 10-14

5) STEPS IN A DEFAMATION LAW SUIT 15-16

6) MODEL-FORMAT 18-26

7) CONCLUSION 27

4|Page
 CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

INTRODUCTION

Life, liberty, property and reputation are basic human rights. Everybody has a right to have
justified name. To defame someone is to attack his reputation. Reputation of a person may be
damaged by communication. Reputation of a person may be damaged by communication of
thoughts and intention from one man to another. A defamatory statement is one which
involves an imputation against a living person, which is injurious to that person in his trade,
or profession, or holds him up to hatred, ridicule of contempt.

Defamation is the publication of a statement which tends to lower a person in the estimation
of right thinking members of society generally, or which tends to make them shun or avoid
that person. The statement must be false and capable of bearing a defamatory meaning. The
essence of the tort of defamation is the publication or communication of the falsehood to at
least one person other than the person defamed.1

Defamation refers to the act of publication of defamatory content that lowers the reputation of
an individual or an entity when observed through the perspective of an ordinary man. If
defamation occurs in spoken words or gestures (or other such transitory form) then it is
termed as slander and the same if in written or printed form is libel. Defamation in India is
both a civil and a criminal offence.

In Civil Law, defamation falls under the Law of Torts, which imposes punishment in the
form of damages awarded to the claimant (person filing the claim). Under Criminal Law,
Defamation is bailable, non-congnizable and compoundable offence. Therefore, the police
cannot start investigation of defamation without a warrant from a magistrate (an FIR cannot
be filed). The accused also has a right to seek bail. Further, the charges can be dropped if the
victim and the accused enter into a compromise to that effect (even without the permission of
the court). Defamation as a criminal offence is listed under section 499 of the Indian Penal
Code.

1
A.B. Kafaltiya, “Textbook on Pleadings, Drafting & Conveyancing”. (New Delhi: Universal Law
Publishing2010)

5|Page
 CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

TYPES OF DEFAMATION

Libel and slander, both forms of defamation, are creatures of English common law, but they
are not treated as distinct from each other in Indian jurisprudence. India offers the defamed a
remedy both in civil law for damages and in criminal law for punishment. This is highly
unusual since defamation as a crime is almost nonexistent anywhere in the world. While civil
law for defamation is not codified as legislation and depends on judge-made law, criminal
law is in the Indian Penal Code (section 499 creates a criminal offence of defamation.)

In a civil action, the claimant needs to prove that the statements injured the person’s
reputation and were published. The onus then shifts to the defendant to prove that the
imputations or statements were either true, or amounted to fair comment, or were uttered or
stated in circumstances offering absolute or qualified privilege like Parliamentary or judicial
proceedings.2

When the defamatory statement is permanent such as pictures, effigies, writing and print, it
is referred to as libel and where it is statement of a like kind in a transient form such as
speech, gestures and facial mimicry, it is called slander. However broadcasting of defamatory
matter is held as liable. The main result of this distinction between libel and slander is that in
case of libel it is actionable per se i.e. without proof of damage; but slander, on the other
hand, requires proof of special or actual damage. Slander is actionable per se in the following
cases:3
(a) Slander imputing a criminal offence punishable by imprisonment.
(b) Imputation of unchastity on the part of a woman.
(c) Imputation that the plaintiff suffers from a contagious disease, such as would cause
others to shun and avoid him.
(d) Imputing professional incompetence against the plaintiff which is calculated to
disparage the plaintiff in any office, profession, calling, trade, or business.

In a case where the words are not first sight defamatory or may not be expressly, but
appear as such when the surrounding circumstances have been explained. Such statement
may be constituted defamatory by implication. In such a case, the plaintiff is required to
show that words have hidden meaning with reference to him, which a reasonable person
2
Available at http://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/common-law/types-of-defamation.php accessed on
24th April, 2016.
3
Available at http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/libel-vs-slander-different-types-defamation.html
accessed on 24th April 2016.

6|Page
 CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

could interpret as defamatory. Such a defamatory statement is called an innuendo.

Whether a statement is claimed to be expressly defamatory, or to depend upon an
innuendo, the plaintiff must prove that that the words were published to a specific person
who knew at the time of publication of specific facts enabling that person to understand
the meaning of the words in the innuendo sense.
If there is repetition of public of defamatory statement, each publication give rise to
a separate cause of action. The defamatory statement must be published to a “third
person”. The term “third person” does not include the defendant’s spouse but includes the
plaintiff spouse. Publication need not be intentional. The defendant’s motives are
generally immaterial. But where the defendant puts his motive or intention or innocence
in issue, the plaintiff then, in order to rebut the defence, prove the malice or improper
motive of the defendant.4
There are various special defences available to the defendant in defamation
cases. Justification- that the statement complained of is substantially true; a fair comment
on a matter of public interest; absolute privilege; qualified offer to amend and apology are
in general use of defence in defamatory matters.

4
Available at http://blog.ipleaders.in/a-simple-guide-to-understanding-civil-and-criminal-defamation/accessed
on 24th April, 2016.

7|Page
 CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

RIGHT TO SUE AND GENERAL RULES RELATING TO

DEFAMATION SUITS

Right to sue for defamation is personal; a person who is defamed has a right to sue
except, when the person is not sui juris in which case his guardian or next friend may sue.
For example, where a daughter is defamed her father cannot sue, but if the daughter is
minor her father can sue on behalf of the daughter. Apart from criminal complaint, a
person who is defamed can file a civil suit for the recovery of damages. An injunction
under section 38 and section 39 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 can also be obtained to
restraint repetition of defamatory publication. Sections 75 and 76 of the Limitation Act,
1963 respectively provided that a suit for damages for libel must be filed within one year
from the date when the libel is published.

Suit for compensation for slander must be brought within one year from the date when the
words are spoken, or when the words are not actionable in themselves, when the special
damage complained or results. Award of damages are entirely discretionary; the Court
has to decide damages according to the facts and circumstances of each case depending
on the injury caused to the person so defamed.5
The law of defamation varies from state to state, but there are some generally accepted
rules. If you believe you are have been "defamed," to prove it you usually have to show
there's been a statement that is all of the following:

 published

 false

 injurious

 unprivileged
1. First, the "statement" can be spoken, written, pictured, or even gestured. Because
written statements last longer than spoken statements, most courts, juries, and
insurance companies consider libel more harmful than slander.
2. 2. "Published" means that a third party heard or saw the statement -- that is, someone
other than the person who made the statement or the person the statement was about.

5
Available at http://injury.findlaw.com/torts-and-personal-injuries/defamation-law-the-basics.html accessed on
25th April, 2016.

8|Page
 CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

"Published" doesn't necessarily mean that the statement was printed in a book -- it
just needs to have been made public through television, radio, speeches, gossip, or
even loud conversation. Of course, it could also have been written in magazines,
books, newspapers, leaflets, or on picket signs.

3. A defamatory statement must be false -- otherwise it's not considered damaging. Even
terribly mean or disparaging things are not defamatory if the shoe fits. Most opinions
don't count as defamation because they can't be proved to be objectively false. For
instance, when a reviewer says, "That was the worst book I've read all year," she's not
defaming the author, because the statement can't be proven to be false.

4. The statement must be "injurious." Since the whole point of defamation law is to take
care of injuries to reputation, those suing for defamation must show how their
reputations were hurt by the false statement -- for example, the person lost work; was
shunned by neighbors, friends, or family members; or was harassed by the press.
Someone who already had a terrible reputation most likely won't collect much in a
defamation suit.

5. Finally, to qualify as a defamatory statement, the offending statement must be

"unprivileged." Under some circumstances, you cannot sue someone for defamation
even if they make a statement that can be proved false. For example, witnesses who
testify falsely in court or at a deposition can't be sued. (Although witnesses who
testify to something they know is false could theoretically be prosecuted for perjury.)
Lawmakers have decided that in these and other situations, which are considered
"privileged," free speech is so important that the speakers should not be constrained
by worries that they will be sued for defamation. Lawmakers themsleves also enjoy
this privilege: They aren't liable for statements made in the legislative chamber or in
official materials, even if they say or write things that would otherwise be
defamatory.6

6
Available at http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/free-speech-and-civil-defamation accessed on 25th
April, 2016.

9|Page
 CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

DEFENCES AVAILABLE FOR DEFAMATION

Defamation is defined as “the publication of a statement which reflects on a person’s

reputation and tends to lower him in the estimation of right-thinking members of society
generally or tends to make them shun or avoid him.” The Indian Penal Code, 1860 defines
defamation as the wrong done by a person to another’s reputation by words, signs or visible
representation (S. 499). The aim of the law of defamation is to protect one’s reputation,
honour, integrity, character and dignity in the society. Defamation is both a crime and a civil
wrong. An aggrieved person may file a criminal prosecution as well as a civil suit for
damages for defamation. Under common law there are some general defences available to all
torts like consent, apology, accord, limitation and previous judgments.7

Accord –
Accord signifies the presence of assent from the plaintiff. In Lane v. Applegate8, the
defendant burnt libelous papers on plaintiffs agreeing not to sue if that was done. The court
held that as there was a prior accord from the plaintiff he could now not claim for damages.

Apology –
An apology is not under the common law, a defence to an action for defamation but it is only
a circumstance in mitigation of defences. However, in England under the Libel Act of 1943
this defence is available under certain circumstances. For example- Apology is available as a
defence in actions for libel against newspapers and other periodical publications if the
newspaper inserts a sufficient apology and adheres to certain other conditions. When there is
an apology and an acceptance thereof the defendant can resist the plaintiff’s suit for
reimbursement for defamation. Nevertheless, there has been no similar legislation in India. In
past judgments the court has held that even if the plaintiff accepted an apology and withdrew
a criminal prosecution for defamation he can still sue the defendant in a civil suit
Govindacharylulu v Srinivasa Rao9 . This ratio was reiterated in Narayanan v Mahendra10.

7
Available at http://www.lawyersclubindia.comaccessed on 25th April, 2016.
8
(1815) 1 Stark 49
9
AIR 1941 Mad 860.
10
AIR 1957 Nag 19.

10 | P a g e
 CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

Consent –
As observed by Salmond if the plaintiff has expressly or impliedly consented to the
publication complained of or if it had invited the defendant to repeat those words before
witness the defendant can use this defence. If a person telephones a newspaper with false
information about himself, he would not be able to sue in defamation when the newspaper
publishes it.
Limitation –
In India, the right to take legal action for defamation is restricted in accordance with the
Limitation Act, 1963 to a period of one year. (Section 75 and Section 76 of the Limitation
Act limit the period of filing a suit for compensation of libel and slander respectively to one
year).
Specialized Defence to Defamation
#Justification by Truth
# Fair (and bona fide) Comment
# Privilege (which may be either absolute or qualified)
Justification by Truth
In a defamation suit it is not required from the claimant to prove the falsity of the
statement for the reason that the law assumes that in his favour. Nevertheless the
defendant can plead justification (the technical expression for truth). Truth of defamatory
expression is an absolute defence in a civil action. The law has recognized this defence
for the reason that since defamation is essentially an injury to a man’s reputation, when it
is shown that what is spoken of person is true it means only that his reputation has been
brought down to its proper level and there is no reason for him to complain.

M’Pherson v. Daniels11embodies this principle commenting that “the law will not permit
a man to recover damages in respect to an injury to a character which he either does not
or ought not to possess.” The motive or maliciousness is immaterial to the extent the
charges are correct. It would make no difference in law that the defendant had made a
defamatory statement devoid of any belief in its truth, if it turned out afterwards to be true
when made.

11
1829 10 B & C 263.

11 | P a g e
 CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

FairComment-
The defence of fair comment is different from that of justification. Under the latter, the
defendant must prove the truth of every defamatory fact alleged and every injurious
imputation made. On the other hand, under the former the defendant must prove that the
facts on which the comment is based are true and that the comment on these facts is fair.
Another point of distinction is in relation to the mental state of the defendant. In the case
of justification the state of mind of the defendant at the time he published the defamatory
imputations is immaterial. Thus the presence of actual malice is irrelevant to the defence
of justification. In contrast, in the case of fair comment the state of mind of the defendant
at the time he published the defamatory statements is most material. Thus he cannot avail
of any facts as justifying his comment of which he was ignorant at the time he published
the words complained of.

Proof of actual malice would defeat the idea of fair comment.

Under fair comment it is enough to prove that there was some substratum of fact on
which the comment was based. To succeed in a defence of fair comment the defendant
must show that the words complained of were:
• expressions of opinion and not statements of fact, i.e., they constituted mere comment
• fair and bona fide (without malice)
• on a matter of public interest.

The word ‘fair’ embraces the meaning of honest and also of relevancy. The view
expressed must be honest and must be such as can fairly be called criticism. The word
‘fair’ refers to the language employed, and not to the mind of the writer. Mere
exaggeration or even gross exaggeration does not make a comment unfair but
maliciousness may negative fairness.

Comment in order to be fair must be based upon facts, and if the defendant cannot show
that his comments contain no misstatement of fact he cannot prove a defendant of fair
comment. Facts on which the comment is based must be truly stated though later on they
may not turn out to be true at all.12 A fact may be truly stated and may yet be utterly
untrue.

12
Available at http://www.wikihow.com/Sue-for-Defamation accessed on 25th April, 2016.

12 | P a g e
 CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

Where the facts on a matter of public interest have been correctly stated, the test of fair
comment is whether the opinion which is expressed in the comment even though it might
be exaggerated, obstinate or prejudiced was honestly held by the writer. The comment to
be fair must be based on true facts and must be objectively fair in the sense that any man
however, prejudiced and obstinate could have honestly held the views expressed. The
defence is concerned with protection of comments and not imputation of fact.

AbsolutePrivilege
In matters of absolute privilege, no action lies for the defamatory statement even though
the statement is false or has been made maliciously. In these cases, the public interest
demands that the individual’s right to reputation should give way to the freedom of
speech. Absolute privilege is recognized in the case of parliamentary proceedings,
judicial proceedings, State communications and Military and Naval Proceedings. Thus
statements made by an officer of the state to another in course of official duty are
absolutely privileged for reasons of public policy.

An absolute privilege extends to statement and words used in the proceedings which have
relevance to the matter before the court. These words should not cross the limits of
relevance. In Pukhraj v State of Rajasthan13 it was held that the words (sale, gunde,
badmash) and actions (kicking the plaintiff) of postal authorities had no link to the
discharge of their duties. An action for defamation therefore was valid.

QualifiedPrivileges –
A privileged occasion in reference to a qualified privilege is when a person who makes a
communication has an interest or a duty – legal, social or moral – to make it to the person to
whom it is made has a corresponding interest or duty to receive it. The test for this defence is
requirement of public interest. In certain cases the speaker is prevented if there is absence of
malice.

13
1973 SCC (Cri) 944.

13 | P a g e
 CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

In Radheshyam Tiwari v Eknath14 the defendant who was the editor of a local Marathi
Weekly published a series of articles mentioning that the plaintiff, who was a BDO,
issued false certificates, accepted bribe, adopted corrupt and illegal means to mint money
and was a ‘Mischief Monger’. In an action for defamation, the defendant pleaded all three
defences. The defence of Justification was discarded as truth of facts mentioned could not
be proved. The defence of Fair Comment was not accessible because there was a
statement of fact, rather than an expression of opinion. The defence of qualified privileges
could also be not availed because the publications were mala fide.

14
AIR 1985 Bom 285.

14 | P a g e
 CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

STEPS IN A DEFAMATION LAW SUIT

File the Complaint

Once you've met with your attorney and he or she has done some initial investigation, a
Complaint will be filed. This is the document that initiates the lawsuit. However, it is
important to bear in mind that lawsuits like these move more slowly than most people would
like. Filing a lawsuit does not mean that all will be said and done in a couple of months.
Sometimes it takes a year or more for a case to go to trial, if it is not settled. Settlement
negotiations can also be ongoing over the life of a case.15

Service and Discovery

After a lawsuit is filed, the defendant has to be served and has a brief window of time in
which to respond in writing. Then, the court issues a scheduling order, which gives all the
important deadlines in a case. At that point, the process called "discovery" begins. Discovery
is the formal investigation undertaken by both sides to a case. Each party will send the other
(through attorneys) written questions called Interrogatories. These questions are answered
under oath, and they help the opposing party find out more about you, your potential
witnesses, and the facts of your case.

The other party probably will also ask you to produce documents that back up your claims.
Your attorney will work with you to gather documents and answer questions. Sometimes
there are reasons that you can withhold documents or decline to answer questions, and your
attorney can advise you about that.

Depositions
Then, depositions will probably occur. A deposition is an interview under oath during which
the attorney for the other party asks you questions. This is an opportunity for him or her to
size you up and determine what kind of witness you will be at trial, how a jury might
perceive you, and how strong your claims are. Your lawyer will help you prepare. Usually the
two opposing parties in a case are deposed, but sometimes other witnesses may be questioned
as well, such as doctors, friends or relatives who have knowledge about your case.

15
Available at http://www.alllaw.com/articles/nolo/civil-litigation/filing-civil-lawsuit-defamation-expect.html
accessed on 25th April, 2016.

15 | P a g e
 CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

Settlement

Once the discovery process is over, settlement negotiations typically begin in earnest.
Attorneys think about settlement throughout the case, but the discovery process provides the
information that most attorneys need to assess the likely outcome of the case (should it
proceed through trial), and they can advise their clients about settlement, armed with this
information.16

16
Available at http://www.alllaw.com/articles/nolo/civil-litigation/starting-defamation-character-lawsuit.html
accessed on 25th April, 2016.

16 | P a g e
 CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

MODEL FORMAT

Model -1

In the Court of Civil Judge Class - I at Indore

Suit No. 1472 / 2015

Kartik Kaushal s/o Risabh Kaushal
123, M G Road, Indore, MP ......................................... Plaintiff

Vs.

Prakash Pandey s/o Ajeet Pandey

456, M G Road, Indore, MP ......................................... Respondent

Plaint under Order 7 Rule 1 for Compensation for Defamation

The plaintiff respectfully states as follows : -

Brief Description of the case:

(1) The respondent publicly accused the plaintiff of selling watered down milk, which has
caused immense harm to the reputation of the plaintiff. The present suit is meant for
compensation for the harm done to the plaintiff's reputation.

Matters of Inducement:
(2) Plaintiff is a milk man and sells milk in many colonies of Indore including MG Road, AB
Nagar.
(3) Respondent is the president of an informal residents association of MG Road.

Facts constituting cause of action:

(4) In a residents association meeting held on 6/3/2015, the respondent publicly accused the
plaintiff of selling milk mixed with water. A tape record of the respondent making the
accusation is attached with this petition.
(5) The said speech made by the respondent was heard by hundreds of residents of MG Road,
where the plaintiff sells milk.
(6) The said speech has caused the plaintiff a lot of embarrasment and loss of business.
(7) The plaintiff denies that he sells watered milk and claims that the statement made by the
respondent was completely baseless.

17 | P a g e
 CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

Jurisdiction:
(10) The meeting where the defamatory statement was made by the respondent happened in
Indore, which is under this court's jurisdiction.
(11) The plaintiff claims, on account of the loss of business as well as mental agony, an
amount of 40,000/- which is under this court's jurisdiction.

Relief Claimed:
(12) The plaintiff prays that the court be pleased to order the respondent to pay sum of Rs
40,000 on account of the loss of business because of his baseless and false speech. The
plaintiff further prays that the respondent be ordered to pay compensation for mental
harassment and cost of this litigation.
Kartik Kaushal.
Sudhir Sahay.
Verification
I, Kartik Kaushal, do hereby verify that the contents from paras 1 to 12 are correct and true
to the best of my knowledge and personal belief and no part of it is false and nothing material
has been concealed therein. Affirmed at Indore this date of 16th July.
Kartik Kaushal.
Place: Indore.
Date: 16.7.2015.
Affidavit:
Civil Suit No.: 1472 of 2015 (Under Order VII, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908)
Plaintiff Versus Defendants Affidavit in support of Plaint under Order VII of the Code of
Civil Procedure 1908 I Kartik Kaushal, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:- 1.
That the accompanying plaint has been drafted under my instructions. 2. That the contents of
paras 1 to para 11 of the accompanying plaint are correct and true to the best of my
knowledge and no part of it is false and nothing material has been concealed therein. 3. That I
further solemnly affirm and declare that the contents of this affidavit of mine are correct and
true and no part of it is false and nothing material has been concealed there from. Affirmed
here at Indore this 16th July.

18 | P a g e
 CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

MODEL-2

In the Court of Civil Judge Class-1 at Patna.

Suit No. 2672/2014

Rita Singh d/o Vinay Kumar Singh ..........................................................Plaintiff

624, Boring Road, Patna, Bihar
Vs.
Sunil Kumar s/o Prashant Kumar ...........................................................Defendant
612, Nala Road, Patna, Bihar

Suit for recovery of Rs 50,000 as compensation for libel

The plaintiff begs to submit as under:

1.That the plaintiff and defendant were candidates for election for the Municipal Ward No.23
in the city of Patna in the year 2014.
2.That the defendant published a poster which contained inter alia the following allegations
about the plaintiff:
Viz.,That the defendant is a man of corrupt identity and he lacks the requisite credentials
One of such posters is filed with the plaint.
3.That the defendant circulated the said posters by hand wisely in the said Municipal ward
and got similar posters posted on walls of houses and shops at prominent places in the said
areas.
4.That the language of the said posters is highly defamatory for the plaintiff and humiliates
him in the eyes of his friends, acquaintainces and the public in general. The allegations
contained therein are absolutely false to the knowledge of defendant.
5.That several voters withheld their votes and did not cast the same in favour of plaintiff, but
for publication of the said posters, would have been cast in his favour. For instance Shri Ajay
Yadav Voter No2165 and Shri Ram Nath Chaurasia Voter No 2290 and several others
mentioned, after the election, to the plaintiff that they had been dissuaded from voting in
plaintiff’s favour on account of contents of the poster which was read by them prior to the
election.
6.That the plaintiff is a respectable, law-abiding citizen of Patna city. His good reputation has
been injured by the aforesaid conduct and tortuous acts of the defendant committed on 13.01.
19 | P a g e
 CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

2014 when the said posters were published as aforesaid. The defendant is liable to
compensate the plaintiff for such injury.
7. That the plaintiff made a demand in writing, through lawyer’s notice, for payment of Rs.
50,000 by the defendant within a month of said notice, but the defendant has neglected to pay
the said sum. It is submitted that in view of plaintiff’s status in life and view of of the vile
abuse and false allegations made in me said poster by the defendant, the aforesaid figure of
Rs50,000 is a fair estimate of the compensation which the defendant should me made liable
to the plaintiff.
8. That the cause of action arose to the Plaintiff on13.01. 2014 the day when the said libel
was published in the city of Patna. Hence, the suit is within time and the court has
jurisdiction.
9. That the value of the suit for purposes of court-fee and jurisdiction is Rs50,000. Hence, the
court has jurisdiction.
10. It is prayed that a decree for payment of Rs50,000 as compensation for publication of the
said libel be passed against the defendant in favour of the plaintiff or such other relief as the
court deems just be passed in favour of the plaintiff or such other relief as the court deems fit
be passed in this behalf and the cost of the suit be also awarded to the plaintiff.
Rita Singh.
Sunita Singh.

Verification
I, Rita Singh, do hereby verify that the contents from paras 1 to 10 are correct and true to
the best of my knowledge and personal belief and no part of it is false and nothing material
has been concealed therein. Affirmed at Patna on this date of 22nd May.

Place: Patna.
Date : 22.5.2014
Affidavit:
Civil Suit No.: 2672 of 2014 (Under Order VII of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908) Plaintiff
Versus Defendants Affidavit in support of Plaint under Order VII of the Code of Civil
Procedure 1908 I, Rita Singh, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:- 1. That the
accompanying plaint has been drafted under my instructions. 2. That the contents of paras 1
to para 10 of the accompanying plaint are correct and true to the best of my knowledge and
no part of it is false and nothing material has been concealed therein. 3. That I further
20 | P a g e
 CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

solemnly affirm and declare that the contents of this affidavit of mine are correct and true and
no part of it is false and nothing material has been concealed therefrom. Affirmed here at
Patna this 22nd May.

21 | P a g e
 CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

MODEL NO 2 (WRITTEN STATEMENT)

1.Para 1 is admitted.
2,Para 2. is denied. Defendant did however come across such a poster but it was not
published by the defendant.
3.Para 3. is denied. Neither the defendant himself, nor through his accredited agent did he
circulate the said poster.
4.Para 4 is not admitted. The language of the poster contains some true statements. They
cannot be characterized as absolutely false. Many persons and voters believed the same to be
true.
5.Para 5 is not admitted to be correct. Shri Ram Nath Chourasia is closely related to the
plaintiff. Shri Ajay Yadav is a neighbour of the plaintiff. Shri Ajay Yadav stood surety for the
plaintiff in a loan transaction with ICICI Bank.
6.In reply to para 6 of the plaint, it is stated that the plaintiff is an ordinary citizen and a voter
in Patna Municipality. His reputation among the voters is not good. The said poster has not
lowered the estimation in the minds of the citizens and voters than what he possessed prior to
such publication. In any case the defendant is not liable to compensate the plaintiff for any
injury caused to his reputation.
7.Para 1 to para 7 in so far as it relates to sending of lawyer’s notice is concerned is admitted,
but it is not admitted that the plaintiff was legally due to the sum of Rs 50,000 or any sum at
all or that the figure of Rs 50,000 is a fair estimate of any compensation payable to plaintiff.
8.No cause of action has accrued to plaintiff against defendant. The court, has however,
jurisdiction to try the suit
9. It is submitted that the suit be dismissed with costs.
Sunil Kumar.
Rajeev Ranjan.

Verification
I, Sunil Kumar, do hereby verify that the contents from paras 1 to 9 are correct and true to
the best of my knowledge and personal belief and no part of it is false and nothing material
has been concealed therein. Affirmed at Patna on this date of 24th June.
Place: Patna
Date:24.06.2014.
Affidavit:

22 | P a g e
 CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

Civil Suit No.: 2672of 2014 (Under Order VII of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908) Plaintiff
Versus Defendants Affidavit in support of Plaint under Order VII of the Code of Civil
Procedure 1908 I, Sunil Kumar, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:- 1. That the
accompanying plaint has been drafted under my instructions. 2. That the contents of paras 1
to para 10 of the accompanying plaint are correct and true to the best of my knowledge and
no part of it is false and nothing material has been concealed therein. 3. That I further
solemnly affirm and declare that the contents of this affidavit of mine are correct and true and
no part of it is false and nothing material has been concealed therefrom. Affirmed here at
Patna this 24th June.

23 | P a g e
 CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

MODEL NO. 3

In the Court of Civil Judge class-1 at Agra

Suit No. 1432/2013.

Shikha Gupta d/o Shreyali Gupta................................................................Plaintiff

442, Ballygunje, Agra.
Vs.
Ratna Sahay d/o Kumud Sahay.................................................................Defendant
448, Balygunje, Agra.

The plaintiff begs to submit as under:

1.That the defendant delivered a public lecture on 14.10.2012 at Agra University where more
than 500 persons were present. During the said lecture the defendant referred to traders who
sells superior goods and by way of innuendo referred indirectly to plaintiff by indicating the
street and its corner shop and advertisement of genuine articles. Persons present at the lecture
understood that the defendant referred by descriptions to plaintiff.
The following among other persons present at the said lecture were
ShriNaveen Shukla of Delhi.
Shri Shankar Mahadevan of Noida.
Shri Pulkit Prakash of Haryana.

2. That the said reference by the defendant by way of innuendo to the plaintiff has lowered
the plaintiff in the estimation of his customers and other persons which has resulted in
diminishing of his income since the date of the said, lecture.

3.That for such slanderous act of the defendant, he is liable to compensate the plaintiff for
injury caused to his reputation and to his trade and business.

4. That prior to the date of said lecture, the plaintiff had very good reputation both among the
traders as well as the general public. He never in indulged in sale of spurious goods. The
defendant has no reasonable cause for referring indirectly to the plaintiff as seller of spurious
articles.

24 | P a g e
 CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

5. That the plaintiff made a demand on the defendant to pay Rs. 30,000 as the damages for
the slander aforesaid mentioned or to make a public apology in two local newspapers but he
has refused to comply with the same demand.
6. That the cause of action arose to the plaintiff on. 14.10.2012 when the defendant uttered
the slanderous words at Agra University. Hence, the court has jurisdiction.
7. Valuation.
8. Prayer.

Shikha Gupta.
Aarti Singh.

Verification
I, Shikha Gupta, do hereby verify that the contents from paras 1 to 8 are correct and true to
the best of my knowledge and personal belief and no part of it is false and nothing material
has been concealed therein. Affirmed at Agra on this date of 2nd October.

Place: Agra.
Date: 02/02/2013.
Affidavit:
Civil Suit No.: 1432of 2013 (Under Order VII of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908) Plaintiff
Versus Defendants Affidavit in support of Plaint under Order VII of the Code of Civil
Procedure 1908 I, Shikha Gupta, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:- 1. That the
accompanying plaint has been drafted under my instructions. 2. That the contents of paras 1
to para 8 of the accompanying plaint are correct and true to the best of my knowledge and no
part of it is false and nothing material has been concealed therein. 3. That I further solemnly
affirm and declare that the contents of this affidavit of mine are correct and true and no part
of it is false and nothing material has been concealed therefrom. Affirmed here at Agra this
2nd February.

25 | P a g e
 CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

CONCLUSION

The term "defamation" is an all-encompassing term that covers any statement that hurts
someone's reputation. If the statement is made in writing and published, the defamation is
called "libel." If the hurtful statement is spoken, the statement is "slander." The government
can't imprison someone for making a defamatory statement since it is not a crime. Instead,
defamation is considered to be a civil wrong, or a tort. A person that has suffered a
defamatory statement may sue the person that made the statement under defamation law.

Defamation law tries to balance competing interests: On the one hand, people should not ruin
others' lives by telling lies about them; but on the other hand, people should be able to speak
freely without fear of litigation over every insult, disagreement, or mistake. Political and
social disagreement is important in a free society, and we obviously don't all share the same
opinions or beliefs. For instance, political opponents often reach opposite conclusions from
the same facts, and editorial cartoonists often exaggerate facts to make their point.

Finally, it is important to consider the potential side effects of defamation litigation. While a
lawsuit is definitely an option to redress a wrong, and you may succeed, media coverage of it
may make the statement more widely publicized than it was before, compounding the harm.
Even if the case settles, settlements are often confidential and the public may be left with the
wrong impression about the outcome. These cases can also be costly. Unless your attorney
takes the case on a contingent fee basis, gathering facts and finding experts can be very
expensive.

Defamation law aims to strike a balance between allowing the distribution of information,
ideas, and opinions, and protecting people from having lies told about them. It's a
complicated area of law. The public has a right to criticize the people who govern them, so
the least protection from defamation is given to public officials. When officials are accused
of something that involves their behaviour in office, they have to prove all of the above
elements of defamation and they must also prove that the defendant acted with "actual
malice."

26 | P a g e
 CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

BIBLIOGRAPHY
 BOOKS REFFERED:

1) Kafaltiya, A.B. ,Textbook on Pleadings, Drafting & Conveyancing. New Delhi: Universal
Law Publishing, 2010.
2.) Kumar, H.L., Legal Drafting. New Delhi: Universal Law Publishing, 2012.
3.) Bindra, N.S., Pleadings & Practice. New Delhi: Universal Law Publishing,2013.

 WEBSITES REFFERED:

1) http://injury.findlaw.com/torts-and-personal-injuries/defamation-law-the-basics.html.
2) http://www.alllaw.com/articles/nolo/civil-litigation/starting-defamation-character-
lawsuit.html.
3) http://www.alllaw.com/articles/nolo/civil-litigation/filing-civil-lawsuit-defamation-
expect.html
4) http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/timeline-defamation-claim.html

27 | P a g e