BLOOMBERG TELEVISION PRODUCTION SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. ZEE ENTERTAINMENT ENTERPRISES LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal under Order XLIII Rule 1(r) read with Sec. 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 has been preferred against the order 1/3/2024 passed by the Learned Additional District Judge-05, South District, Saket Courts, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'ADJ') in CS DJ 137/2024 titled as 'Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd. Vs Bloomberg Television Production Services India Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.' whereby an ex-parte ad-interim injunction in an application filed by the respondent under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure was granted, resultantly directing appellants herein to take down from their website an Article dtd. 21/2/2024 within one week of the receipt of the impugned order.

(2.) The appellants' contend that appellant nos.1 and 2 are companies incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and operate and function as a media publication under the name of 'Bloomberg'. The appellant company enjoys an untarnished and unblemished reputation and goodwill in the eyes of public at large owing to their high standards of ethics, integrity and diligence in reporting. The appellant no.3 is the Editor, South Asia and Middle East, of the appellant no.1 company and the appellants' no.4 and 5 are journalists of the appellant no.1 company. The respondent is a company incorporated under the Companies Act and is engaged inter alia in the business of media and entertainment.

(3.) Insofar as the relevant facts pertaining to the present appeal are concerned, on 21/2/2024, an Article titled as 'India Regulator Uncovers $241 Million Accounting Issue at Zee' was published on the website of the appellants' no.1 and 2. It is contended by appellants that Article was based on proper research and after confirmation of the contents thereunder from reliable resources. The appellants further contend that they had also approached the respondent seeking quotes on the subject to which the respondent had replied and the communication exchanged has been filed by the respondent in the Suit, which is a testament to the fact that the appellants had approached the respondent to maintain the standards of integrity and fair speech. Further, it is contended that the contents of the Article are not a matter of the opinion of the appellants and reflects the higher standards of ethics, journalism and professional etiquettes employed by the appellants in preparing and / or publishing the Article in question. According to the appellants, they have displayed honest journalism as their endeavour had been to publish factually correct Articles, which may be an irritant for some. The said Article talks about the status of the Zee-Sony merger as well as an ongoing investigation carried out by the the Securities and Exchange Board of India (hereinafter referred to as 'SEBI') qua the Respondent.