BHAGWAN SINGH Vs. UJAGIR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of a Suit to recover damages for libel. The claim was Rs. 300. The Munsif found that the alleged libel had been made and published by the first three defendants and gave the plaintiff a modified decree against them assessing the damage at a hundred rupees. On appeal the Subordinate Judge has reversed this decision and dismissed the suit. Of the issues framed by the Munsif the first was whether the defendants or any of them had made and published the defamatory statements in the libel which took the form of a petition to the Town Superintend dent of Messrs. Tata & Co. Issue 2 was whether the plaintiff's reputation was lowered thereby and issue 3 was whether the plaintiff was entitled to damages and, if so, how much. The defence of defendant 1 was denial of the alleged publication. He did not plead either justification or privilege.

(2.) The defences put forward in the written statement of defendants 2 to 4 raise a plea of justification that the imputations were true and an issue as to this might well have been framed by the Munsif; but as he dealt with it on the merits the omission is not of importance. Before the Munsif the further contention was raised at the hearing that the occasion was one of absolute privilege. The Munsif held that publication was proved against defendants 1 to 3 but not against defendants 4 and 5; that it was not shown that the plaintiff was a man of bad character; that it was not at all proved that he sells women or that he keeps Chattisgarhia girls.

(3.) The Munsif further held that the allegations in the petition were reckless and false, were not made bona fide and were not made with belief in their truth. He held that no case of privilege was made out and that the plaintiff was entitled to damages which he assessed at Rs. 100 against those of the defendants who had published the libel; that is to say, defendants 1 to 3. Against this decree defendants 1 to 3 preferred an appeal jointly to the District Judge and it is to be noticed that in the memorandum of appeal it is nowhere contended either that the libel was justified or that the occasion was privileged. The appeal was directed against the finding regarding publication and the finding regarding damages.