HARSH MENDIRATTA Vs. MAHARAJ SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff, Smt. Harsh Mendiratta, has filed this suit for the recovery of Rs.10,00,000.00 lacs on account of damages and compensation for defamation of her husband by the defendants and thereby causing her mental torture, pain and agony.

(2.) Briefly narrated the averments made in the plaint are that plaintiff's husband Sh.Arjun Lal Mendiratta was a permanent staff member of the food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations and was holding a permanent status with FAO/UN. It is alleged that by a telex message received from the Director of Personnel, FAO, Rome, Arjun Lal Mendiratta was directed to report to defendant No.1 Dr. Maharaj Singh to work as Assistant to Project Director. Accordingly, Arjun Lal Mendiratta reported for duty to the defendant No.1 on 5/12/1986. Arjun Lal Mendiratta expected that he would be given duties which were being performed by V.Kumar, as Administrative Officer of the project at that time. Defendant No.1 was not at all prepared to give charge of the duties performed by V.Kumar to Arjun Lal Mendiratta. It is alleged that defendant No.1 did not give any record, files, keys, vehicles, duties/job, equipment, petty cash, etc. to enable Arjun Lal Mendiratta to perform his duties properly. Rather Arjun Lal Mendiratta was asked to shift project office from Krishi Bhavan building to Krishi Anusandhan Bhawan, Pusa, New Delhi without even providing him proper staff, facilities, amenities, cash, vehicle etc. Arjun Lal Mendiratta, however, managed to transfer the project office to Krishi Anusandhan Bhavan, Pusa by 20/12/1986, despite complete non-cooperation from the Project Director. Instead of providing the aforesaid amenities and facilities to Arjun Lal Mendiratta, defendant No. 1 surrendered the project vehicles to FAO on 1/01/1987. Defendant No.1 is alleged to have arranged taking over of the project unit equipment by Ashok Malhotra who was merely a typist in the project who stood relieved from the strength of the FAO with effect from 1/01/1987 in terms of the decision taken by the Government of India to the effect that no FAO personnel will be retained in the project beyond 1/01/1987.

(3.) Sh. Ashok Malhotra had already been offered the substitute post of Assistant in I.C.A.R. and he had accepted that offer on 1/01/1987 itself. It is alleged that despite that the defendant No.1 did not relieve Ashok Malhotra. Then on 3/01/1987 defendant No.1 left India for three weeks to USA without leaving any instructions to Arjun Lal Mendiratta whereupon Arjun Lal Mendiratta vide his letter dated 19/01/1987 informed various authorities that he had not been assigned supporting staff, equipment, records, funds. project vehicles, etc to enable him to perform his duties and responsibilities as Assistant to Project Director. It is further alleged that in all the correspondence with the Union of India defendant No.1 has been showing the name of Mr. V.Kumar, as Administrative Officer of the Project without even mentioning the name of Arjun Lal Mendiratta. The name of Arjun Lal Mendiratta was not published even in the staff list nor even a entry gate pass was got issued for Arjun Lal Mendiratta. It is further alleged that in the month of March, 1907 the Chief of the Agricultural Operations Branch of FAO, Rome along with his assistant visited defendant No.1 several times. Defendant No.1 kept the said visits and meetings secret from Arjun Lal Mendiratta so that he may not be able to inform the Chief of the Agricultural Operations about the irregularities and malpractices which were being committed by defendant No.1. Rather defendant No.1 misused his position by furnishing false information against Arjun Lal Mendiratta with ulterior motive to cause loss, mental torture, agony to him and his family members and to defame him in the eyes of the public and colleague.