BALA RAM Vs. SUKH SAMPATLAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE second appeal before me is by a defendant and arises out of a suit for damages for libel. It raises questions involving the essential distinction between what are known as general damages and those characterised as special damages, as also about the mode of pleading special damages.

(2.) ON 28 -9 -1957 a notice purporting to have been issued by the defendant appellant Sri Bala Ram Kachhawaha appeared in a Hindi newspaper Lok Jeevan' published by Shri Shyamsunder Vyas defendant No. 2, The paper had two offices; one at Jodhpur and another at Jaipur but it is printed at Jaipur. Plaintiff Sardarmal was an estate agent i.e., he used to bring about the sale and purchase of immovable properties on commission basis. Sri Balaram Kachhawaha was a tenant of the plaintiff's son and was occupying a shop at Sardarpura, Jodhpur. The plaintiff considered this notice to be defamatory of himself and accordingly filed the suit for damages to the tune of Rs. 3,000/ - both against Shri Balaram and Shri Shyamsunder in the Court of Civil Judge, at Jodhpur.

(3.) THE learned Civil Judge framed a number of issues and recorded the evidence of the parties. He came to the conclusion that it was Shri Balaram Kachhawaha at whose instance defendant No. 2 published the notice in the paper; that it was defamatory of the plaintiff and the plaintiff had suffered damages on account of the notice. He further held it proved that the plaintiff suffered loss of business to the tune of Rs. 1,000/ -. He further held that the plaintiff was also entitled to the general damages to the tune of Rs. 2,000/ -. Accordingly he passed a decree for Rs. 3,000/ - against both the defendants.