Bombay HC Sets Aside Process Issued Against Tata Trustee Venkatraman In Shapoorji's Defamation Complaint [Read Order]

Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Ballard Pier had issued process against Venkatraman in an order dated October 11, 2018. Venkatraman had filed a criminal writ petition before the high court which was heard by Justice Mridula Bhatkar, who set aside the process issued.

According to Shapoorji's complaint, Venkatraman made a defamatory statement on May 30, 2018 by issuing a press note on the website of the Tata Trusts where he is working as a managing trustee and director of Air Asia India Ltd. He issued the press note to the print media and his statement was published on the websites of Tata Trusts and electronic media. Few statements in the said press note were found to be defamatory and, therefore, the complaint was lodged by the complainant Shapoorji Pallonji & Company Pvt. Ltd.

The press note was issued by Venkatraman after an FIR was registered by the CBI naming him as an accused. In the press note, Venkatraman said- "In my capacity as non-executive director of Air Asia India Limited, I have been wrongly named as an accused by the CBI on operational matters where I had little or no role to play. It is commonly known that the present accusations qua Air Asia India find their root in baseless allegations made by Mr.Cyrus P Mistry and the Shapoor Pallonji Group against Tata Trusts Trustees (me included) and Tata Sons in his 'revenge' legal actions.

Emails purportedly written by me have been circulated in the media in the context of the issue of 5/20 in the aviation sector. This has been a much-debated policy matter and Air Asia India was one of the many airlines that had formally sought a review of this policy."

Senior Counsel Abhishek Manu Singhvi appeared on behalf of the petitioner along with Senior Counsel M Parasaran. They submitted that the press note dated May 30, 2018, is to be read in context with the previous battle between Tata Sons and Shapoorji Pallonji.

The CBI registered an FIR due to the false statement of inducement by the complainant, against the petitioner. The NCLT by its order dated July 12, 2018, was pleased to dismiss the company petition filed by Cyrus Investments and Sterling Investments on merits and all the allegations were comprehensively rejected and dismissed by NCLT, Singhvi said. He further submitted that the NCLT in its judgment has found the allegations to be "abominably baseless" and "scurrilous".

Criticising the order of issuance of process, Singhvi submitted that the complainant has addressed no defamatory statement against Shapoorji Pallonji Co. Pvt. Ltd. but the statement was made against the Shapoorji Pallonji Group because M/s. Cyrus Investments and M/s.Sterling Investments are a part of Shapoorji Pallonji Group and no statements were made against the Shapoorji Pallonji Co. Pvt Ltd. He relied on Section 199(1) of CrPC and said the case of defamation cannot be filed by any other person except the person who is defamed.

Advocate Abad Ponda appeared on behalf of Shapoorji Pallonji and Company Pvt Ltd and argued that Shapoorji Pallonji Co Pvt Ltd is a part of Shapoorji Pallonji Group and it is unconnected to M/s. Cyrus Investments and M/s.Sterling Investments and is in no way concerned with the litigation between Mr.Cyrus Mistry and Tata Sons. It is altogether a distinct entity and the allegations made against the Shapoorji Pallonji Group are applicable to the complainant company as it forms a part of the Shapoorji Pallonji Group.

Ponda pointed out the averments made in the complaint and submitted that the complainant has never approached the CBI in relation to the affairs of the accused qua Air Asia. The complainant has not made a single allegation against the Tata Sons Trustees much less baseless or motivated. The statement that the Shapoorji Pallonji Group indulged in revenge legal action and a smear campaign is run by the Shapoorji Pallonji Group; includes the complainant and hence, is defamatory statement against the complainant because the complainant has not run any smear campaign to discredit the accused and thus, there was no question of making any baseless or motivated allegations against the accused. Ponda submitted that there is no justification in making an allegation against the entire Shapoorji Pallonji Group of which the company is a part.

Order

After examining submissions from both parties and various judgments of the Supreme Court and high courts, Justice Bhatkar noted: "Mr.Ponda's submission that two letters from other companies or customers enquiring about the press note statement, is evidence of defamation, is not acceptable. The impugned words do not create contempt, hatred or ridicule against the complainant/respondents, if the test of reasonable and right thinking common man is applied."

The court concluded-

"Thus, in this case, I am of the view that the words which are used in the press note are not at all defamatory. They are moderate and temperate. They do not invite contempt, ridicule or hatred against the persons mentioned in the press note and much less the complainant. Certain statements, if found incorrect, can be corrected without labelling them defamatory. The words used and the statement made in the press note cannot be perceived as defamatory."

Therefore, the order dated October 11, 2018, issuing process against Venkatraman was quashed and set aside.

Read the Order Here