TULSIDAS AMANMAL KARANI Vs. SFBILLIMORIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application for revision of an order of the Chief Presidency Magistrate made on November 17, 1931, discharging a notice and dismissing a complaint of defamation under Section 600 of the Indian Penal Code, The complainant was Mr. Tulsidas Amanmal Karani, who is a solicitor, and the accused was Khan Bahadur S.B. Billimoria, who is an advocate.

(2.) The material facts are briefly these. One Bharmal or his son-it is not clear which-had rented a certain room in a chawl and the landlord sued the son to recover arrears of rent. A decree was obtained ex parts and in execution of it a warrant was issued for the arrest of the defendant, i.e., the son of Bharmal. The bailiff, however, arrested Bharmal himself on the representation that he was the real tenant and debtor. Bharmal was temporarily released by the Registrar of the Small Causes Court on the ground that he was not named in the warrant. He was given time to apply to the Court. Instead of that, however, he filed a criminal complaint in the Mazagaon Police Court against Bhagwandas, the plaintiff in the suit, and other persons for wrongful arrest, In the meantime the plaintiff in the suit made an application under Order I, Rule 10, of the Civil Procedure Code, in the Small Causes Court to get the decree rectified by substituting Bharmal's name for the name of his son. Notice was issued to Bharmal and it came on for hearing before the Small Causes Court Judge Mr. Kurwa on September 11, 1931, An advocate Mr. Oks appeared for Bharmal and Khan Bahadur Billimoria for the judgment creditor, and it was on this occasion that the alleged dafamatory statement was made. It should be mentioned that Mr. Tulsidas was not personally concerned in these proceedings, at any rate in this sense that he was neither a party nor a witness. But Bharmal was living with him at the time of the execution of the warrant and it appears that he accompanied Bharmal and supported him before the Registrar of the Small Causes Court. He was also called and examined as a witness in the criminal case in the Mazagaon Police Court, and, in the opinion of the learned Chief Presidency Magistrate, his conduct had shown that he was interesting himself in the proceedings on Bharmal's behalf.

(3.) At the hearing of the notice the Judge suggested that the case might be compromised. Bharmal, however, was unwilling to accept the terms offered, and according to Mr. Billimoria's version of what happened, he said that he wanted to consult Mr. Tulsidas, who was not actually present in Court but in the Library. When Bharmal said this it is alleged that Mr. Billimoria stated as follows:- Bharmal who is an insolvent is put up by the attorney (meaning Mr. Tulsidas) who is also an insolvent.