G GOPALASWAMY Vs. N RAGHAVULU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Original Application in O.A. No. 680 of 2013 is filed by the plaintiffs under Order XIV Rule 8 of the High Court Original Side Rules read with Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, seeking interim injunction restraining the respondent, his men, agents, servants or subordinates from publishing or causing any act, lowering the image of the applicants in the eye of the public and thereby causing harm to the reputation of the applicants, pending disposal of the suit. The suit has been filed, seeking permanent injunction restraining the respondent/defendant, his men or agents from making any publication or sending letters to various authorities or causing any act concerning the applicants/plaintiffs in any manner, lowering the image or reputation of the applicants and also for damages for the loss of reputation and goodwill caused by the respondent/defendant, estimated at Rs. 50 lakhs. In the application, seeking interim injunction, as stated in the application, restraining the respondent till the disposal of the suit.

(2.) THE applicants/plaintiffs have stated that the respondent/defendant has addressed improper letters to various authorities, defaming the reputation of the applicants/plaintiffs, hence, legal notice was issued by the applicants/plaintiffs to the respondent/defendant on 18.04.2013, however, the respondent/defendant sent only a false and misleading reply on 21.05.2013 and sending again various letters to the authorities, defaming the reputation of the applicants, which necessitated in filing the suit, seeking permanent injunction, as stated above and also damages for causing loss of reputation and goodwill to the applicants/plaintiffs and seeking interim injunction by way of filing the application.

(3.) DURING 1984, the respondent/defendant had approached the applicants with a proposal to start a school. The respondent in this regard, took part in an auction held by Tamil Nadu Housing Board and succeeded in getting land being allotted. However, only the first applicant and his friend one Raghava Rao paid the entire sale consideration and on account of the close relationship of the first plaintiff with the defendant, the respondent/defendant was given share in the property and a partnership deed was also drawn up and a primary school by name Maruthi Vidyalaya was started and on 25.04.1996, the Maruthi Educational Trust was created. Ms. Shyamala Devi, wife of the respondent was made Correspondent of the Maruthi Matriculation School at the request of the respondent, however, the respondent, his wife Ms. Shyamala Devi had filed a suit in C.S. No. 407 of 2006 before this Court and obtained an order of interim injunction against the Trustees from interfering with her functioning as Correspondent and the respondent as Principal of the School. Later on, the said suit was transferred to the City Civil Court, Chennai and numbered as O.S. No. 6894 of 2010. Subsequently, the said suit was re -transferred to this Court. The suit in C.S. No. 196 of 2011 was filed by the trustees against Ms. Shyamala Devi and Others, seeking to frame a scheme under Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure.