Defamation Suit for damages
Promulgation of Defamation Ordinance, has made defamation actionable under statute law (section 3, 4 and 9 of Defamation Ordinance the plea of fair comment on a matter of public good or interest, absolute or qualified privilege or if it is shown to be with the permission or consent of the injured and aggrieved person.
Defendant, the author of the libellous material in the present case, had sought refuge behind the plea of fair comment on the matter of public interest, but before any evidence could be led in support of defence pleas the other defendant-company which had made documentary film of the said material and telecast the same twice was dissolved by the order of the `court. Defendant, being author of the insinuating documentary film chose not to appear in the proceedings before the court.
Burden to prove the issue which was on the defendants, in circumstances, was not discharged. Telecast of the impugned material therefore, was not privileged. Suit of plaintiff, in circumstances, was decreed to the ectent of general damages, in the sum of $49500 as against the defendant/ author only as suit against the company which had telecast the material stood abated on the dissolution of the defendant company on Court’s order.