PARSHOTAM DUTT GAUTAM Vs. ASHWANI GAUTAM AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition, under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India, has been maintained by the petitioner, against the order dated 20.08.2016, passed by learned Civil Judge (Sr. Div.), Sirmaur District at Nahan, H.P. in CMA No. 190/6 of 2016 filed in case No. 35/1 of 2011, whereby an application under Order 1, Rule 10(2) Civil Procedure Code has been allowed and the present petitioner has been arrayed as defendant No. 3 in the suit.

(2.) Briefly stating facts giving rise to the present petition are that present respondents No. 1 and 2/applicants (for short "the applicants") filed an application under Order 1 Rule 10(2), read with Sec. 151 Civil Procedure Code for addition of Parshotam Dutt, S/o late Sh. Laxmi Dutt as party to the suit. It has been averred in the application filed by the applicants that they have filed civil suit against present proforma respondents No. 3 and 4/defendants (for short "defendants) for recovery of Rs. 10 lac on account of defamation, mental and physical torture committed by them by publishing defamatory statements in their daily Hindi Newspaper 'Aapka Faisla' on 11.05.2010 and 17.05.2010. It has been further averred by the applicants that vide their application dated 21.11.2012, filed under Order 7, Rule 14 CPC, they have sought permission to file certain documents i.e. complaint and inquiry report etc. based on the aforesaid complaint. During preparation of case, it has been found that Sh. Parshotam Dutt Gautam S/o lat Sh. Laxmi Dutt Gautam, R/o Chhota Chowk, Nahan has also made complaints against them to the office of Additional Director General, State Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau, H.P. Shimla, which in routine had come to Dy. S.P. P.S. S.V. and Anti Corruption Bureau, Nahan for inquiry and investigation. The Dy. S.P. conducted inquiry and investigation upon the said complaints, however during the inquiry, the complaint containing defamatory and false allegations, was found to be false. Accordingly, the applicants prayed in the application that as Parshotam Dutt Gautam is guilty of committing defamation, he is also required to be arrayed as party defendant in the suit.

(3.) In reply to the application, the defendants raised preliminary objection qua maintainability. On merits, it has been averred that the defendants did not publish any defamatory news against the applicants. It has been further averred that complaint, if any, filed by Parshotam Dutt Gautam against the defendants, cannot be made subject matter of the present case and prayer for dismissal of the application has been made.