V J PRAKASH Vs. NIRANJAN NATH PANERI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ARE we to act as 'dumb driven cattle' of English Judges, unaware of Indian Social customs, ethics, morals, dictating from graves about the legal implications of hurling abuse and insult 'Idio ' by a boss to his subordinate clerk ? If use of insult and abuse like 'Bhaddukavas', 'Sala', Haramzada' (bastard), 'Soor' (pig) 'Bapar Beta', 'Out caste', 'Chandal' have been held to be not actionable for damages, by English Judges in India or English Judges or English Law oriented Indian Judge, there is no wordly reason that after proclamation of 'Equality' in Preamble and Article 14, 15 and 14 of the Constitution, I should blindly follow the English precedents and permit service Bosses to humiliate their subordinates by calling names with impunity from damages. Should I hesitate to respectfully disagree if not reject the obsolete outdated English law dictum that on such defamatory abuses and insults no actionable claim can be enterained in Torts and insults special injury and damages are proved ? Neither English Judge in India can be treated as Gods or Semi Gods, nor every principle of English law, bereft of Indian conditions can be treated as Divine Injunctions or Dharam Shastras or binding precsdent. New Dimensions and new Horizons of law originating from Indian Constitution and its functioning for last 3 decades; whether have evaporated and vanished the old, obsolete, imperialist concept of English Judges based on English law, who insisted on special injury and damages, in Torts, based on defamatory abuses and insults, is the pivot of lively and enlightening debate in this otherwise most dry branch of litigation - -a civil second appeal.

(2.) THE controversy is about the use of the abuse, 'idiot' by the appellant against the respondent. The question pressed by Shri S.N. Bhar -gava, the learned Counsel for the appellant, which requires adjudication, is, whether the use of the words, 'idiot', go away', 'get out' from chamber', are defamatory words for which a claim of damages can be entertained under the torts.

(3.) SHRI Bhargava who has argued this appeal, has submitted that it is only verbal abuse which was used in the heat of passion and anger and, was never meant to defame the plaintiff in the eyes of other persons. According to Shri Bhargava, the word, 'idiot', is not defamatory and more so, when it is used by the Officer against his employee in the heat of passion and angery mood during conversation or quarrel.