MUSHTAQ AHMED MIR Vs. AKASH AMIN BHAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DECREE and judgment dated 5th Nov. 2007 passed by ld. Principal District and sessions Judge Kupwara in civil suit titled Mushtaq Ahmed vs. Akash Amin Bhat is challenged in this civil 1st. Appeal by appellant (hereinafter referred to as plaintiff ).

(2.) THE plaintiff instituted civil original suit in the court of ld. Principal district Judge kupwara against respondent, seeking therein for issuance of a decree to the tune of rs. Two lacs as compensation and damages in his favour and against the respondent. The plaintiff claimed to be an indigent person and sought permission of the court to institute the suit in the forma pauperis. The foundation for seeking above referred decree was laid in the suit on the ground that because of publication made by respondent in his News paper "tamil e Irshad" of which he is printer, publisher and editor, the reputation of the plaintiff has gravely and deeply suffered in the society. The plaintiff pleaded that respondent published a News items in his news paper on 20. 03. 06 stating therein that besides of other persons the plaintiff has been ordered to be lodged in Jail for being allegedly involved in the commission of heinous offence of murder under the orders of the ld. Sessions judge kupwara. The plaintiff in the suit has pleaded that he in no way was connected with the commission of the offence and was never lodged in any jail under the orders of the ld. Sessions Judge Kupwara. The plaintiff stated that because of publication of this libelous News his reputation in the eyes of his relatives, friends and society at large suffered badly and he though, possess good reputation was because of the news item published by the respondent looked down upon by "tom Dic and Hary". The plaintiff, accordingly, instituted a suit seeking decree for damages/compensation to the tune of Rs. 2/- lacs against the respondent. The plaintiff's suit was instituted in forma pauperis on 19. 06. 06. The ld. trial court on that date ordered for registration of the same and issuance of notice. The ld. trial court directed the Collector Kupwara to submit report about claim of the plaintiff being an indigent person. The notice was served on the respondent and despite service he chose not to appear and was accordingly proceeded ex-parte on Sept. 1st. 2006. After receipt of the report from Collector and after examining three witnesses of the plaintiff, the trial court vide its order dated 14. 02. 2007 allowed the plaintiff to institute the suit as an indigent person and suit was ordered to be registered and notice was issued to the respondent. The respondent was proceeded ex-parte as despite service of notice he chose not to appear before the trial court.

(3.) THE proceedings in the suit were conducted in ex-parte and evidence of the plaintiff was recorded in support of his case by the trial court. The trial court in terms of the impugned judgment and decree, however, dismissed the suit of the plaintiff. The plaintiff has challenged the said decree and judgment by filing of this appeal on the grounds that the trial court has failed to appreciate the case of the plaintiff and has also failed to apply its judicial mind to the evidence produced by the plaintiff. The plaintiff has further stated that the decree and judgment under challenge is rendered bad in law as the ld. trial judge has failed to appreciate the controversy in its correct legal perspective. Heard ld. counsel for parties. Considered the matter.