The Delhi High Court has granted interim relief to MA Yusuff Ali, Chairman of Lulu Group International, by directing Shajan Skariah, the editor of online Malayalam news portal “Marunadan Malayalee”, to remove all defamatory content published against the billionaire businessman from social media within 24 hours.

On failure to do so, YouTube has been directed to take down all such defamatory content posted in the Marunadan Malayalee channel against Yusuff Ali and to suspend the operation of the channel . Further, the Court restrained Skariah from using any platform/social media platforms including YouTube for making any comments/remarks in relation to Yusuff Ali.

The court observed that even though the right to free speech and expression is a fundamental tenet of liberty which is considered to be an indispensable part of an effective democracy, the same does not give an absolute right to abuse one’s freedom to defame others. “The law related to defamation is one such reasonable restriction on the freedom of speech as prescribed under the Constitution”, the court said.

“prima facie seem to be a misuse of the liberties where in the garb of freedom of speech and expression” and that he “is unnecessarily targeting the Plaintiff and his business group and posting false and defamatory content about the Plaintiff”.

$~28
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CS(COMM) 360/2023 & I. A. 10540/2023 & I. A. 10542/2023 & I.
A. 10543/2023
MR. YUSUFFALI MUSALIAM VEETTIL ABDUL KADER
….. Plaintiff
Through: Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, and Mr. Saurabh
Kirpal, Sr. Advocates with Mr.
Pravin Anand, Mr. Haris Beeran, Mr.
Saif Khan, Mr. Achuthan Sreekumar,
Mr. Mushtaq Salim, Mr. Ranjeeta
Rohatgi, Mr. Nikhil Arora, Mr. Rohit
Bansal, Mr. Azhar Assees and Ms.
Apoorva Prasad R., Advocates
versus
MR. SHAJAN SKARIAH & ORS. ….. Defendants
Through: Appearance not given for D-1 and D2
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA DHARI SINGH
O R D E R
% 26.05.2023
I.A. 10541/2023 (Exemption)
Subject to the plaintiff filing the clear, original and legible/typed
copies of any dim documents on which the plaintiff may seek to place
reliance, within four weeks from today, exemption is granted for the
present.
Digitally Signed
By:DAMINI YADAV
Signing Date:26.05.2023
19:08:58
Signature Not Verified
The application is disposed of.
CS(COMM) 360/2023
1. The instant plaint has been filed on behalf of the plaintiff seeking the
following reliefs:-
“(i) A decree and an order of permanent injunction restraining
the Defendant No. 1 and all others acting for and on his behalf
from making, posting, publishing, uploading, distributing
and/or re-publishing any false, defamatory and libellous
content against the Plaintiff or his business enterprise LULU
Group on any platform whether online or offline which results
in the violation of the Plaintiff’s right to privacy and
personality rights and right to life and which can bring
disrepute and tarnish the to the Plaintiff’s goodwill and
reputation in India and across the globe; and
(ii) An order directing the Defendant No. 1 and all others
acting for and on his behalf from to take down all false and
defamatory content posted by them regarding the Plaintiff from
all platforms, whether online or offline and a further order
directing the Defendant No. 2 to immediately effectuate all
orders that may be passed by this Hon’ble Court; and
(iii) A decree and an order granting damages to the tune of Rs
10,00,00,000 in favour of the Plaintiff and against the
Defendant No. 1 with an interest at the rate of 18% per annum
from the date of filing of the suit till realisation of the decree
awarded; and
(iv) A decree and an order directing the Defendant No. 1 to
make and publish a full-page retraction and an apology to the
Plaintiff in the newspaper THE TIMES OF INDIA for the false
and defamatory campaign made by the Defendant No. 1; and
(v) An order directing the Defendant No. 1 to disclose and
render accounts of all sums earned by him through the various
false and defamatory content as referred to in the plaint; and
(vi) An order granting exemplary and punitive damages and
costs in favour of the Plaintiff and against the Defendant No. 1;
and
(vii) An order directing the Defendant No. 2 to take down and
Digitally Signed
By:DAMINI YADAV
Signing Date:26.05.2023
19:08:58
Signature Not Verified
permanently disable the YouTube channel of the Defendant No.
1; and
(viii) An order directing Defendant No. 2, YouTube, to
permanently disable access to all infringing content that is
uploaded by Defendant No. 1, as highlighted in paragraphs 13,
14, 16, 17, 21 and 23 of the plaint, and/or any other videos
identical to, or similar in content, and/or any other videos
and/or content in any format, including but not limited to use of
pictures, names, images, likeness that violate the rights of the
Plaintiff, as specified in the plaint in line with the Information
Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics
Code) Rules, 2021; and
(ix) An order directing Defendant No. 3, MeitY to ensure that
access is permanently disabled to all infringing content that is
uploaded by the Defendant No. 1 paragraphs 13, 14, 16, 17, 21
and 23 of the plaint, and/or or any other videos which are
identical to, or similar in content, and/or any other videos
and/or content in any format, including but not limited to use of
pictures, names images, likeness that violate the rights of the
Plaintiff, as specified in the plaint; and
(x) Any other Order(s) as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and
proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”
2. Learned senior counsels for the plaintiff submitted that the plaintiff is
a non-resident Indian and the Chairman and Managing Director of the LuLu
Group International. The Plaintiff is currently residing at Villa No. 16, Plot
No. 190, Sector – W52, Al Mushrif Area, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.
The plaintiff is involved in many social, charitable and humanitarian
activities in India as well as in the Gulf countries and he is actively involved
in protecting the interests of Non-Resident Indians and fostering social and
communal harmony amongst the NRI’s in the Gulf. The plaintiff is an
internationally known figure whose name is held in high regard by the
general public in light of his extensive commercial, social and philanthropic
Digitally Signed
By:DAMINI YADAV
Signing Date:26.05.2023
19:08:58
Signature Not Verified
activities for the last 50 years.
3. It is submitted that the Defendant No. 1 in the instant case is one
Shajan Skariah, who appears to be the principal officer, Chairman/Publisher
of a website and online news channel called www.marunadanmalayalee.com.
Defendant No. 1 also has a YouTube channel located at
https://www.youtube.com/@marunadanmalayali8276 which was created on
28th November, 2018 and as on 24th May, 2023, it has 1.97M subscribers and
1,658M views. Defendant No. 1 has another YouTube channel located at
https://www.youtube.com/@MarunadanTV which was created on 25th
December, 2009 and as on 24th May 2023, it has 2.45M subscribers and
1,871M views.
4. Defendant No. 2 is Google LLC and has been made a party, as the
Defendant No. 1 is posting ex-facie false and defamatory statements and
comments regarding the Plaintiff on the abovementioned channel hosted on
YouTube which is owned and operated by Google LLC.
5. Defendant No. 3 is the Ministry of Electronics and Information
Technology. The Plaintiff has no dispute with the Defendant No. 3 but is
only seeking its indulgence to ensure that once orders of the Court are
passed, all infringing, defamatory and unlawful videos posted by the
Defendant No. 1, or any other videos, are delisted and disabled permanently.
6. Learned senior counsels for the plaintiffs submitted that the grievance
of the Plaintiff against the Defendant No. 1 is that the Defendant No. 1 is
running an online defamatory campaign against the Plaintiff and is making
ex-facie false and defamatory statements and comments regarding the
Plaintiff online. The Defendant No. 1’s activities are distasteful and have
been done solely with the motive of maligning the reputation and fame
Digitally Signed
By:DAMINI YADAV
Signing Date:26.05.2023
19:08:58
Signature Not Verified
enjoyed by the Plaintiff. The Defendant No. 1 has been publishing false and
defamatory content about the Plaintiff ever since 2013 on his website
https://www.marunadanmalayalee.com. All such instances of publishing
defamatory contents are enlisted along with the URLs and with description in
paragraphs 13, 14, 16, 17, 21 and 23 of the plaint.
7. Learned senior counsels for the plaintiff submitted that a suit has also
been filed before the Additional Sub-Judge, Subordinate Judge’s Court,
Emakulam, Kerala and titled as Shri. Yusuff Ali M.A. & Anr. Vs. Shri. T.P.
Nandakumar & Ors.; OS No. 274/2020 against various parties including the
Defendant No. 1 and his news channel previously for having made false and
defamatory allegations and statements against the Plaintiff. In the said suit,
the court had passed a detailed injunction order dated 9th April, 2021
injuncting the Defendant herein from making and publishing false and
defamatory statements, videos etc. against the Plaintiff. A complaint was
also filed before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-VIth, Lucknow
seeking relief against the defamatory statements made by the Defendant No.1
against the Plaintiff. Vide Order dated 15th April, 2023, summons were
issued on the Defendants. The said matters are sub-judice before the
respective Courts.
8. Learned senior counsels for the plaintiff submitted that even though
the said matters pertained to a different subject matter arising from a separate
cause of action, despite specific and detailed injunction orders, the Defendant
No. 1 continues to post defamatory and false content relating to the Plaintiff.
The aforesaid clearly evince the writ large conduct of the Defendant No. 1 of
carrying out a defamatory propaganda against the Plaintiff by making
incorrect, false, concocted and inflammatory allegations against the Plaintiff
Digitally Signed
By:DAMINI YADAV
Signing Date:26.05.2023
19:08:58
Signature Not Verified
in order to incite public sentiments against the Plaintiff.
9. It is, therefore, prayed that a decree and an order of permanent
injunction be issued thus restraining the Defendant No. 1 from making,
posting, publishing, uploading, distributing and/or re-publishing any false,
defamatory and libelous content against the Plaintiff or his business
enterprise LuLu Group on any platform resulting in the violation of the
Plaintiff’s right to privacy, personality rights and right to life which can bring
disrepute and tarnish the Plaintiff’s goodwill and reputation in India and
across the globe.
10. Heard learned counsel for the plaintiff and perused the record.
11. Let the plaint be registered as a suit.
12. Issue summons to defendants.
13. Learned counsels appearing on behalf of the defendant no. 1 and 2
accepted summons.
14. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the defendant no. 1
vehemently opposed the instant suit on the ground of maintainability and
also referred to the judgment of a Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case
of Ajay Pal Sharma v. Udaiveer Singh in CS (OS) 139/2020 dated
28.07.2020. He submitted that this Court has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the
instant suit. He also raised the objection regarding the insufficient court fees
deposited for filing the instant suit.
15. Issue summons to defendant no. 3 through all modes.
16. The summons shall indicate the written statement(s) shall be filed
within thirty days by the defendants from the date of receipt of summons.
17. Along with the written statement(s), the defendants shall also file
affidavit of admission/denial of the documents of the plaintiff.
Digitally Signed
By:DAMINI YADAV
Signing Date:26.05.2023
19:08:58
Signature Not Verified
18. Liberty is given to the plaintiff to file replication(s), if any, within
thirty days from the receipt of the written statement(s). Alongwith the
replication(s) filed by the plaintiff, affidavit of admission/denial of the
documents of the defendants be filed by the plaintiff.
19. List before the Joint Registrar on 13th July, 2023 for completion of
service and pleadings.
20. List before the Court on 22nd August, 2023.
I.A. 10539/2023 (Under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2)
1. The instant application under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 read with
Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 has been filed on behalf of
the plaintiff seeking the following reliefs:
“a. An order of ex-parte ad-interim injunction restraining the
Defendant No. 1 and all others acting for and on his behalf
from making, posting, publishing, uploading, distributing
and/or re-publishing any false, defamatory and libellous
content against the Plaintiff or his business enterprise LULU
Group on any platform whether online or offline which results
in the violation of the Plaintiff’s right to privacy and
personality rights and right to life and which can bring
disrepute and tarnish the to the Plaintiff’s goodwill and
reputation in India and across the globe; and
b. Directions to Defendants No. 2 and 3 that as and when the
Plaintiff, brings to the notice of the said Defendants,
information regarding resurfacing/recirculation of the videos
/other content mentioned in the present application, the same
shall be taken down; and
c. Directions to Defendant No. 2 to take down and disable the
offending and defamatory videos/content posted against the
Plaintiff, as mentioned in paragraphs 12, 13, 15, 16, 20, and 22
of the instant application; and
d. Directions to Defendant No. 3 to completely disable access
to the YouTube Channel of Defendant No. 1; and
e. Any other order(s) as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the
Digitally Signed
By:DAMINI YADAV
Signing Date:26.05.2023
19:08:58
Signature Not Verified
facts and circumstances of the case and interest of justice.”
2. Learned senior counsels for the plaintiff submitted that the Defendant
No. 1 is running a continuous online defamatory campaign against the
plaintiff and is making ex-facie false and defamatory statements and
comments regarding the plaintiff. The defendant no. 1’s activities are
distasteful and have been done solely with the motive of maligning the
reputation and fame enjoyed by the plaintiff. The defendant no. 1 has been
publishing false and defamatory content about the plaintiff ever since 2013
on his website https://www.marunadanmalayalee.com.
3. Learned senior counsels for the plaintiff stated that in view of the
unabated attacks on its reputation, the Plaintiff was constrained to issue a
legal notice dated 10th April 2023 calling upon the said Defendant to
immediately publish an unconditional apology through various media and to
seize and desist from making/publishing false/malicious and defamatory
remarks/articles against the Plaintiff. However, no response was received to
the said legal notice from the Defendant No. 1.
4. Learned senior counsels for the plaintiff stated that the defamatory
videos as mentioned in the paragraphs 12, 13, 15, 16, 20 and 22 of the
instant application are only illustrative examples and there are many other
false and defamatory videos, posts and contents that have been posted
online by the defendant no. 1. It is also stated that the defendant no.1 by
way of the contents/videos is also tarnishing the reputation of and defaming
the highest officers and constitutional functionaries of the nation.
5. It is further submitted that despite court orders and other legal
proceedings, the defendant no. 1 is till date continuing to post such false and
Digitally Signed
By:DAMINI YADAV
Signing Date:26.05.2023
19:08:58
Signature Not Verified
defamatory videos and content regarding the plaintiff with impunity leaving
the plaintiff with no other option but to approach this Court seeking an
urgent order of injunction against the defendant no.1.
6. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the defendant no.1
vehemently opposed the instant application on the ground of maintainability
and also referred to the judgment of a Coordinate Bench of this Court in the
case of Ajay Pal Sharma v. Udaiveer Singh in CS (OS) 139/2020 dated
28.07.2020. He submitted that this Court has no jurisdiction to adjudicate
the instant suit as well as the application.
7. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the defendant no. 2 submitted
that if the defendant no. 1 does not remove the offending and defamatory
videos/content posted against the plaintiff as mentioned in the paragraphs
12, 13, 15, 16, 20 and 22 of the instant application within 24 hours, the
defendant no. 2 shall remove all the videos as mentioned above.
8. Heard learned counsels for the parties.
9. Issue notice.
10. Learned counsels appearing on behalf of the defendants no. 1 and 2
accepted notice.
11. Issue notice to defendant no. 3 through all modes.
12. Reply(ies) be filed within four weeks.
13. Rejoinder(s) thereto, if any, be filed within two weeks thereafter.
14. Right to privacy and Right to a Dignified Life under Article 21 are
Fundamental Rights enshrined in the Constitution. Every person has the
inalienable right to live a dignified life without discrimination and without
being defamed. The Defendant No. l’s comments prima facie seem to be a
misuse of the liberties where in the garb of freedom of speech and
Digitally Signed
By:DAMINI YADAV
Signing Date:26.05.2023
19:08:58
Signature Not Verified
expression, the Defendant No. 1 is unnecessarily targeting the Plaintiff and
his business group and posting false and defamatory content about the
Plaintiff. As per the statement by the learned senior counsels for the
plaintiff, the defendant no.1 by way of the contents/videos is also tarnishing
the reputation of and defaming the highest officers and constitutional
functionaries of the nation.
15. It is pertinent to take note that even though the right to free speech
and expression is a fundamental tenet of liberty which is considered to be an
indispensable part of an effective democracy, the same does not give an
absolute right to abuse one’s freedom to defame others. The law related to
defamation is one such reasonable restriction on the freedom of speech as
prescribed under the Constitution.
16. Upon a bare perusal of the contents of the plaint and the content
posted by the defendant no.1 on record before this Court, a prima facie case
is made out against the defendant no. 1. Accordingly, in view of the prima
facie case being made out as well as in the interest of protection of rights of
the plaintiff, this Court is of the opinion that in the instant case, an adinterim injunction merits to be granted.
17. Hence, the following order is passed:
ORDER
a) The defendant No.1 is directed to forthwith take down all/any
content published by it on any platform/social media platforms
including that of the defendant no. 2 i.e. YouTube in relation to
the plaintiff as mentioned in the paragraphs 12, 13, 15, 16, 20 and
22 of the instant application within the next 24 hours;
b) Till the next date of hearing, the defendant no. 1 is also restrained
Digitally Signed
By:DAMINI YADAV
Signing Date:26.05.2023
19:08:58
Signature Not Verified
from using any platform/social media platforms including that of
the defendant no. 2 i.e. YouTube for making any
comments/remarks in relation to the plaintiff herein; and
c) Upon the failure of the defendant no.1 to carry out the direction as
mentioned hereinabove, the defendant no. 2/Google
LLC/YouTube is directed to take down all distasteful and
defamatory content published by the defendant no.1 on its
platform using the aforementioned channels on the URLs as
mentioned in the paragraphs 12, 13, 15, 16, 20 and 22 of the
instant application, and to suspend the operation of the channels
owned by the defendant no.1 till the next date of hearing.
18. List before the Joint Registrar on 13th July, 2023 for completion of
service and pleadings.
19. List before the Court on 22nd August, 2023.
CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J
MAY 26, 2023