Disposed

TV18 Broadcast Limited,Rep.by its authorised signatory Mr.Tiji T Joy v. Mr. Maridhas, Son of Mr.Malaichamy

Madras HC24 Jul 2020A/1541/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application filed under Order XIV Rule 8 of OS Rules read with Clause 12 of the Letter's Patent and Order III Rule 1 to grant leave to sue. Leave to institute the suit was granted on jurisdictional grounds.

What did the court decide?

Leave to sue the respondent/defendant under Order III rule 1 of the Original Side Rules, 1956

What the court decided

TV18 Broadcast Limited,Rep.by its authorised signatory… — Company and Corporate | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

A.No.1541 of 2020 in C.S.SR.No.46475 of 2020

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

Dated:24.07.2020

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN

¶6

A.No.1541 of 2020
in C.S.SR.No.46475 of 2020
1.TV18 Broadcast Limited
rep.by its authorised signatory
TIJI T Joy
Having registered office at
First Floor, Empire Complex,
414 Senapati Bapat Marg,
Lower Parel, Mumbai 400 013.
2.Mr.Gunasekaran,
3.Mr.Jeevasagapthan .. Applicant
Vs.
Mr.Maridhas
.. Respondent

¶7

This Application is preferred, under Order XIV Rule 8 of OS Rules read with Clause 12 of the Letter's Patent and Order III Rule 1 of O.S.Rules to grant leave to sue the respondent/defendant under Order III rule 1 of the Original Side Rules, 1956 read with Clause 12 of the Letter Patent.

¶8

1 http://www.judis.nic.in

¶9

A.No.1541 of 2020 in C.S.SR.No.46475 of 2020

¶10

For Applicant : Mr.M.S.Krishnan, Senior Counsel for Mr.Anirudh Krishnan

¶11

ORDER

¶12

The application filed under Order XIV Rule 8 of OS Rules read

¶13

with Clause 12 of the Letter's Patent and Order III Rule 1 of O.S.Rules to institute the Suit in this Court.

¶14

It is stated in the affidavit filed in support of the said application

¶15

that the substantial part of cause of action arose within the jurisdiction of

¶16

this Court, where the offending videos said to have been put up by the respondent/defendant had been downloaded in places within the jurisdiction of this Court, where the 2^nd and 3^rd applicants / plaintiffs are residing and it is further stated that the publications are also in Tamil language and pertains to the 1^st plaintiff / 1^st applicant who has its

¶17

headquarters in Chennai, within the jurisdiction of this Court. It is also

¶18

stated that several communications were received by the applicants/plaintiffs with respect to the materials published by the respondent/defendant to the addresses within the jurisdiction of this Court.

¶19

2 http://www.judis.nic.in

¶20

A.No.1541 of 2020 in C.S.SR.No.46475 of 2020

¶21

3. In view of the above, Leave is granted.

24.07.2020

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.

3 http://www.judis.nic.in

¶26

A.No.1541 of 2020 in C.S.SR.No.46475 of 2020

¶27

¶28

A.No.1541 of 2020
in C.S.SR.No.46475 of 2020

¶29

24.07.2020

¶30

4 http://www.judis.nic.in

TV18 Broadcast Limited,Rep.by its authorised signatory Mr.Tiji T Joy v. Mr. Maridhas, Son of Mr.Malaichamy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

TV18 Broadcast Limited,Rep.by its authorised signatory Mr.Tiji T Joy v. Mr. Maridhas, Son of Mr.Malaichamy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Real Image Media Technologies Vs S.Keerthi Shankar

Maddock Films Pvt.Ltd. Vs Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited

M/s Arudra Engineering Pvt. Ltd, represented by its Managing Director Mr.R.Natraj, Vs M/s Pathanjali Ayurved Ltd, Represented by its Director

Mr.M.Anees Ahmed Vs Raja

Dharma Productions Pvt.Ltd. Vs Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited

Thalappakatti Naidu Anandha Vilas Biriyani Hotel Vs Thalapakattu Biriyani