The Bombay High Court has held that a web portal which was used by members of a Housing Society to malign and abuse each other is as guilty as its residents as it didn't curb the use of offensive words used by one group of members to criticise the opposing faction.

The Court, while issuing injunction on the use of the portal by all the members of the Society, has asked the portal owners to file their reply, failing which the court would pass orders against it.

A bench comprising of Justice AK Menon, while hearing two interim applications in a suit, was informed by the society and its 12 managing committee members that the defendants, which included two members of the society, a non-profit company formed by those two members to manage the affairs of the society, and a web portal, had indulged in defaming the plaintiffs and persons associated with the plaintiff-society.

Senior Advocate Sharan Jagtiani, representing the plaintiffs, submitted that disputes had arisen between the society, its managing committee members and the developer, which had resulted in various legal proceedings, including a challenge to the registration of the society.

While the proceedings were in progress, the defendants had published defamatory and libellous statements against the plaintiffs on electronic media and issued public notices/letters which are defamatory and derogatory, and are causing irreparable damage to the plaintiffs. In light of this, the society and its members filed the interim application, seeking an injunction on the defendants and the web portal from publishing such statements.

The defendants, represented by advocate Mohit Bharadwaj and advocate Deven Jogdeo, submitted that the interim application filed by them had averred that the suit was not maintainable, as the court had stayed an earlier suit filed by the society with similar averments. Bharadwaj submitted that the averments in the two suits are hopefully the same and the cause of action common, and therefore the suit ought to be rejected.

He further submitted that the society and its members had also used defamatory language against the defendants, but the plaintiffs had not taken cognisance of the complaints, and hence, the criminal proceedings were initiated against the 12 managing committee members.

The court was informed that the web portal, despite service, had failed to be represented by an advocate.

After hearing the submissions, the court passed an injunction against the defendants from defaming the plaintiff society and its managing committee members.

“The 4th defendant [web portal] has facilitated carriage of messages on its web-portal and is responsible for its publication,” the court observed.

The court also restrained the web portal from publishing any defamatory material against the plaintiffs. “It is clarified that this restraint does not prevent defendant no 4 from offering the accounting services that it may offer to the defendants, but is restricted to the facility to post messages on their web-portal pending the disposal of the suit,” the order stated.

Source Link

Picture Source :