JUDGMENT This is a suit for damages for defamation enquiry into damages, perpetual injunction restraining the defendants and/or each of them and/or servants and/or agents from further publishing the words get out in Paragraph 12 hereof or any similar libel upon the plaintiff and/or its management along with other consequential reliefs. 2. The defendant Nos. 1 to 5 are concerned newspaper company and its officials i.e. Printer/Publisher, Chairman, Editorial Board & Editor-in-Chief, Executive Editor, Journalist etc. 3. The defendant Nos. 6, 7 and 8 are members of Parliament and Legislative Assembly representing a political party. 4. The plaintiff company is controlled and managed by the following Executives and the Board of Directors :- Mr. R.N. Tata (Chairman) Mr. Keshub Mahindra Mr. N.A. Palkhivala Mr. Akbar Hydari Mr. S.A. Savavala Mr. Mantosh Sondhi Mr. Nusli N. Wadia Mr. L.P. Singh Mr. S.M. Palia Mr. P.K. Kaul (Financial Institutions’ Nominee) Mr. Suresh Krishna Mr. G.P. Gupta (Financial Institutions’ Nominee) Dr. Jamshed J. Irani (Managing Director) Mr. K.C. Mehra (Whole-time Director) Mr. Ishaat Hussain (Whole-time Director) 5. A copy of the Balance Sheet of the Company, being public document produced before the Court and kept as exhibit with Court records. 6. The plaintiff stated that the company has contributed large amounts by way of payment of different taxes to the national exchequer to the extent of Rs. 783.35 crores in the year 1995-96 which works out to 33% approximately of the total revenue of the company for the year. The goodwill of the company is well known in India and abroad. 7. In September 1952 the plaintiff discovered chrome ore deposits in Sukinda Valley, Orissa and became interested to get the land for setting up an industry therein. Ultimately erstwhile Raja of Sukinda granted lease in favour of the plaintiff. Thereafter right of the Zamindars were vested in the State. After various stages of renewal of lease and change in leasehold area by the intervention of Orissa High Court and subsequently by Supreme Court position of leasehold right as well as area vested to a particular position. 8. By the issuance of the said newspaper. Thereafter right of the Zamindars were vested in the State. After various stages of renewal of lease and change in leasehold area by the intervention of Orissa High Court and subsequently by Supreme Court position of leasehold right as well as area vested to a particular position. 8. By the issuance of the said newspaper. "The observer" dated October 7, 1996 under the heading RAO, PATNAIK FAVOURED TISCO FOR CHROMITE MINING : JD LEADERS the defendants falsely and maliciously printed and published or caused to be printed and published of and concerning the plaintiff company and in relation to the conduct of the business of the plaintiff company, the following defamatory words :- (i) "...... The Leaders Janata Dal MLA's, Mr. Ranendra Pratap Swain, Dr. Prasanna Kumar Patsani and Rajya Sabha MP, Mr. Ras Behari Barik have alleged that both the Chief Minister J.B. Patnaik and former Prime Minister P.V. Narasimha Rao received kickbacks to the tune of Rs. 50 Crores for turning a blind eye to the TISCO's activities in the valley during the period ......" (ii) ........ The legislator claimed that the source of money spent in former Mr. Narasimha Rao's constituency, Behrampur, during the last Lok Sabha elections could be traced back to the Tatas ......" (iii) "...... J.B. Patnaik and P.V. Narasimha Rao worked in tandem to give reprieve and precuniary benefit to Tata and both acted and behaved like trustees and dormant partners of Tata. In return, the Tata lavishly funded the Congress during general elections of 1996 ........" 9. The plaintiff alleged the meaning of the publication are as follows :- "(i) The plaintiff company conducts its business in dishonest and improper manner and indulges in corruption and bribery for procuring trading/business gains. (ii) The plaintiff company do not carry out mining in an usual and proper manner but indulges in random mining which expression necessarily means mining in such a manner as would cause damage to the mines. (iii) The plaintiff company earned profit by conducting its business in improper and dishonest manner. (iv) The plaintiff company is involved in a multi-crore chromite scam. The expression ‘Scam’ by itself in common parlance is highly derogatory and suggests improper and dishonest dealings. (v) The plaintiff company have no regard for rule of law and order and ignore the orders of Court of law and of the Government for making business. (iv) The plaintiff company is involved in a multi-crore chromite scam. The expression ‘Scam’ by itself in common parlance is highly derogatory and suggests improper and dishonest dealings. (v) The plaintiff company have no regard for rule of law and order and ignore the orders of Court of law and of the Government for making business. (vi) The plaintiff company have no regard for others property and encroaches upon and use others properties for making business gains." 10. The newspaper was circulated in Calcutta, Jamshedpur and various parts of India and abroad. Several enquiries were made by the shareholders and customers and issued letters of enquiry about the news item at the plaintiffs office within the jurisdiction. 11. The plaintiff issued notice upon all the defendants giving opportunity to each of the defendants to publish apology and withdrawal of aforesaid defamatory statements from the date of the receipt of the letter but none had responded nor given reply thereto. 12. Ultimately the plaintiff instituted this suit before this Hon'ble Court and made an interlocutory application before this Hon'ble Court. Ultimately at the interlocutory stage the concerned personnels of the newspaper on behalf of the defendant Nos. 1 to 5 have tendered their unconditional apology by filing a statement in the newspaper as follows :- "JD allegations against TISCO on Sukinda Valley baseless; OBP regrets error, NEW DELHI: On the basis of statements made by Janata Dal Leaders (1) Ranendra Pratap Swain, MLA, (2) Dr. Prasanna Kumar Patsani, MLA, (3) R. Behari Barik, MP, The Observer of Business and Politics (dated October 7, 1996) had carried a news item, published under the heading "Rao, Patnaik favoured TISCO for chromite mining: Janata Dal Leaders." 13. In the said news item, among other things, it was stated that J.B. Patnaik, former Chief Minister of Orissa and P.V. Narasimha Rao, former Prime Minister, has received kickbacks to the tune of Rs. 50 Crores for turning a blind eye to TISCO's activity in the Sukinda Valley during the period 1995-96. 14. The said article also alleged that the entire deal of TISCO regarding the extraction of chromite from Sukinda Valley was a multi-crore scam, from and out of which the Congress Party derived immense benefit during the last general election. 15. 50 Crores for turning a blind eye to TISCO's activity in the Sukinda Valley during the period 1995-96. 14. The said article also alleged that the entire deal of TISCO regarding the extraction of chromite from Sukinda Valley was a multi-crore scam, from and out of which the Congress Party derived immense benefit during the last general election. 15. It was further alleged in the said article that the source of money spent in Behrampur, the constituency of the former Prime Minister P.V. Narasimha Rao, could be traced back to the Tatas. 16. It was also in clear terms reiterated in the said article that both J.B. Patnaik and Narasimha Rao worked in tandem to give reprieve and pecuniary benefit to the Tatas and both acted and behaved like trustees and dormant partners of the Tatas and in return the Tatas lavishly funded the Congress during the general election of 1996. 17. It was claimed that the matter should be investigated and that it was a fit case for initiating a public interest litigation in the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. 18. However, on further inquiry by the Observer of Business and Politics it was realised that there was no evidence at all for the allegations levelled against the Tatas. All the allegations were found to be baseless. 19. The Observer of Business and Politics regrets having reproduced the above stated unfounded accusations against the House of Tatas. 20. The Observer of Business and Politics apologises to Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. as well as to the persons who are in charge of the management of the said company without any qualification and hesitation for the inconvenience that may have been caused to them in the process. 21. Both the newspaper cuttings exhibited and kept with the record of the Court. 22. Since no defendants contested, the suit appeared before this Hon'ble Court under the heading "Undefended Suit" and pending for quite sometime even the nobody attended this Court on behalf of the defendant. 23. At the initial stage Mr. Hirak Kumar Mitra, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the plaintiff stated that since the people concerning the newspaper being defendant Nos. 22. Since no defendants contested, the suit appeared before this Hon'ble Court under the heading "Undefended Suit" and pending for quite sometime even the nobody attended this Court on behalf of the defendant. 23. At the initial stage Mr. Hirak Kumar Mitra, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the plaintiff stated that since the people concerning the newspaper being defendant Nos. 1 to 5 have tendered their unconditional apology and fresh publication has been given in the newspaper by stating that the allegations as against TISCO are baseless, they are not inclined to proceed against them claiming any monetory relief save and except the relief on account of perpetual injunction. On the other hand, they are not only claiming the perpetual injunction as against the defendant Nos. 6, 7 and 8 i.e. political personnels being the instrument of all baseless allegations but also claiming monetory relief against them to set an example so that in future making reckless statements can be stopped or at least minimised. 24. Although services were made upon the parties but since the monetory relief by way of compensation was sought for in addition to perpetual injunction I have given direction upon the plaintiff to make substituted service by way of publication of advertisement in the newspapers. It was done accordingly and the plaintiff filed an affidavit-of-service to that extent which is kept with the record. 25. In spite of such service at no point of time the defendants being Nos. 6, 7 and 8 appeared before this Court or tendered unconditional apology. 26. The situation is so grave that Court cannot shut out its eyes after observing such situation. Members of the Legislative Parties representing the public at large are part of important wing of the democracy. Therefore, as and when such a person making comment as against other he must know his limitation. Mud throwing neither can help the political parties nor can help the Indian democracy. This is one of the reasons for which judiciary hag been called upon to interfere in every alternative stage. The concerned defendants are so adament that in spite of having opportunities they did not think to attend the Court for tendering an apology for making such baseless allegations. It seems that they wanted to get escape from the Court of law. The concerned defendants are so adament that in spite of having opportunities they did not think to attend the Court for tendering an apology for making such baseless allegations. It seems that they wanted to get escape from the Court of law. Under such circumstances, imposition of compensatory benefit to the plaintiff company in addition to order of injunction is obvious. 27. Irresponsible politicians are spoiling the respect of each and every political party sometimes some Journalists are also cannot avoid responsibility on their part. There should be a check and balance. Today people of the country is totally confused due to the behaviour of such irresponsible politicians and they are greater in numbers but lesser in quality. The country is in danger. Only the responsible politicians, irrespective of any political ideology can control them so that the judiciary can take a breathe. 28. Mr. Mitra, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the plaintiff cited a judgment reported in (1) (1996) 2 All England Reporter 35, John v. MGN Limited to establish the case of damages. I find therein that the successful plaintiff in a defamation action is entitled to recover, as a general compensatory damages, such sum as will compensate him for the wrong he has suffered. A sum must compensate one for the damage to his reputation vindicate his good name and take account of the distress, hurt and humiliation which the defamatory publication has caused. In assessing the appropriate damages for Injury to reputation the most important factor is the gravity of the libel; the more closely it touches the plaintiff's personal integrity, professional reputation, honour, courage, loyalty and the core attributes of its personality, more serious it is likely to be. The extent of publication is also very relevant libel published to millions has a greater potential to came damage than a libel published to a handful of people. A successful plaintiff may properly look to sward of damages to vindicate his reputation; but the significance of this is much greater in a case where the defendant asserts the truth of the libel and refuses any retraction or apology than in a case where the defendant acknowledges the fallacity of what was published and publicly expresses regret that the libellous publication took place. It is well established that compensatory damages may and should compensate for additional injury caused to the plaintiff's feelings by the defendant's conduct of the action, as when he persists in an unfounded assertion that the publication was true, or refused to apologise, or cross-examine the plaintiff in a wounding or insulting way. 29. In action of defamation and in any other actions where damages for loss of reputation are involved, the principle of restitution in integrum is necessarily and even more highly the subjective element. Such actions involved a money award which may put the plaintiff in a purely financial sense in much stronger position that he was before the wrong. Not merely can he recover the estimated sum of his past and future losses, but, in case the libel driven underground, emerges from its lurking place at some future date, he must be able to point to a sum awarded. The essential element in assessing damages are entitled to look at the whole conduct of the defendants or the defendant in particular from the time the libel was published down to the time of giving their verdict. The Court may consider what his conduct before action, after action and in the Court during the hearing of the suit. This Court finds that there is no change from its very inception till the date of hearing therefore this reasoning would weigh strongly against any attempt to equiparate damages for personal injuries and damages for defamation. 30. Under the aforesaid circumstances, I am satisfied that the plaintiff is entitled for the following reliefs and is granted accordingly. There will be a decree In terms of prayer (Cr.) as against the defendants. There will also be a decree for Rs. 5 lakhs each against each of the defendant Nos. 6, 7 & 8 for defaming the plaintiff. The plaintiff will be at liberty to circulate the order through newspapers. This Court has granted a time to the defendant Nos. 6, 7 & 8 for a period of one month from the date of the publication of the order in newspapers to tender unconditional apology to the plaintiff through all leading newspapers or the country including the concerned newspaper being defendant No. 1 to the satisfaction of the plaintiff failing therewith the plaintiff will be entitled to recover the damages awarded by this Court by way of execution. The plaintiff will be entitled for a cost for a sum of Rs. 30,000/- which will be paid by the defendant Nos. 6, 7 & 8 irrespective of their tendering apology before the Court. Decree will be drawn up expeditiously. The department and all parties and the concerned newspaper entrusted for any publication of the order passed herein are to act on a signed copy minute of the operative part of the order.