GAUHATI HIGH COURT ISSUES ORDER ON BRAHMAPUTRA TELE PRODUCTION AND ANR V/S DWIPAYAN DAS

GUWAHATI, India, June 24 -- Gauhati High Court issued the following order on May 26:

1. Heard Ms. B. Bhuyan, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. B.K. Bhagawati, learned counsel for the respondent.

2. This petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the order dated 30.11.2019 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Morigaon in connection with Title Suit No. 1 of 2012, whereby M.J. Case No. 47/2017 of the petitioners under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC for short) for amendment of the written statement, was dismissed.

3. The petitioner No. 1 in this case is Brahmaputra Tele Production Private Limited, represented by its Editor-in-Chief Sri Monoj Goswami and the petitioner No. 2 is the Editor-InChief Sri Monoj Goswami himself. The respondent is Sri Dwipayan Das. The petitioner No. 1 is a private limited company running a TV channel in the name of DY365. They were arrayed as defendant Nos. 1 and 2 respectively, in Title Suit No. 1 of 2012 pending in the Court of the learned Civil Judge, Morigaon.

4. The title suit was brought up against the present petitioners by Sri Dwipayan Das/respondent, claiming damages and compensation to the tune of Rs.5,00,00,000/- (Rupees Five Crores) for defamation against all the defendants/petitioners jointly and severally, allegedly for telecasting, publishing and circulating news items in DY365 channel.

5. The petitioners/defendants contested the title suit and filed written statement and thereafter, issues were framed and the plaintiff i.e. the respondent adduced evidence-in-chief of 10 (Ten) witnesses, amongst whom the respondent, Sri Dwipayan Das was PW-10. PW-1, 2, 5, 9 and 10 have been cross-examined. It is submitted that the respondent/plaintiff could not produce the remaining witnesses for cross-examination and their evidence had been expunged by the learned Trial Court and this case was fixed for the defendant's evidence.

6. The present petitioners have filed a petition praying for a report of the FACT Finding Committee, North Eastern Regional Institute of Science & Technology, Nirjuli, Arunachal Pradesh (NERIST for short). The petitioners learnt about certain facts pertaining to the depositions of the witnesses, which were not available at the time of filing the written statement in the original Title Suit. This petition filed by the petitioners was rejected by the learned Civil Judge, Morigaon vide order dated 24.03.2017. This petition is numbered as petition No. 911/16. This petition and the order dated 24.03.2017 are marked as Annexure-3 of the petition. Against this order, the petitioners preferred a Civil Revision Petition before this Court registered as CRP (I/O) No. 73 of 2017 and in this revision petition, this Court vide order dated 08.05.2017 granted liberty to the petitioners to file an application under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC for amendment of the written statement (Annexure-4).

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=U%2BbhtlrLe2adAHN8Tz%2F1dzi3%2F1pF3P%2Bc%2BK0wrDOlTfz0muVPXGwTSLbnXEXj3RbW&caseno=CRP/26/2020&cCode=1&cino=GAHC010028572020&state_code=6&appFlag=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.