SURYANARAYANH Vs. SITARAMAYAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of an action for defamation which was decreed by the Court of first instance but dismissed on appeal. The case of the plaintiffs is that they were defamed by the defendant on two separate occasions, first, by a letter written by him on 28 July 1933 to one Appal Narasaiya at Kharagpur and secondly, by his making the alleged defamatory statement to the general public at Jamshedpur.

(2.) The lower Appellate Court has disbelieved the evidence adduced by the plaintiffs with regard to the latter part of their ease and the finding of that Court on that point has not been challenged in appeal. The only question is how far the finding of the Court below can be held to be conclusive on the first part of the case. The letter which was written by the defendant to Appal Narasaiya runs as follows: When this state of things was going on daughter of Padma Raju of C. Town in the daytime was in illicit intrigue with toddy wala and at that time the neighbours and other people collected round the house. Mother of toddywala and others made hulla.... After hearing of this occurrence I kept quiet. From that date they did not come to my house nor I went to theirs.

(3.) It is not disputed that this letter was written by the defendant nor is it denied that the daughter of Padma Raju referred to in the letter is plaintiff 2, the wife of plaintiff 1. It must also be stated that the defendant has totally failed to establish the truth of the allegations that plaintiff 2 was in illicit intrigue with a toddywala.