THOMAS GEORGE Vs. JOSEPH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The fifth defendant in a suit for damages is the appellant in this second appeal.

(2.) The first defendant is a company publishing a newspaper and defendants 2 to 4 are the chief editor, printer and reporter respectively of the newspaper published by the first defendant. The case of the plaintiff is that at the instance of the fifth defendant, defendants 1 to 4 published a defamatory news item in their newspaper on 22.11.2007 concerning the plaintiff and the same affected the reputation of the plaintiff. The fifth defendant remained ex-parte. Defendants 1 to 4 contested the suit. The contention raised by the defendants 1 to 4 was that what is reported by them in the news item is true and therefore, the plaintiff has no cause of action against them. The trial court accepted the case of the plaintiff and passed a decree permitting him to recover a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with interest from defendants 1 to 5. The fifth defendant did not challenge the decision of the trial court in appeal. Defendants 1 to 4 though challenged the decision of the trial court in appeal, the appellate court did not interfere with the decision of the trial court. Defendants 1 to 4 did not challenge the decision of the appellate court. However, the fifth defendant, who was the second respondent in the appeal preferred by defendants 1 to 4, has preferred this second appeal challenging the decision of the trial court as confirmed in appeal.

(3.) When the second appeal came up for admission, this Court entertained a doubt as to the maintainability of the second appeal challenging the decision of the trial court as confirmed in appeal by the fifth defendant who did not challenge the decision of the trial court in appeal. Consequently, the learned counsel on either side were directed to address on the question of maintainability of the second appeal. Adv.M.Gopikrishnan Nambiar was also appointed as amicus curiae in the matter.