Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 71481 (KAR)

M/S DREAM AND DEALS INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED v. VIJAYA TIMES

WP/21141/2025 · 2025-07-18

S Sunil Dutt Yadav

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26982 WP No. 21141 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 21141 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. M/S DREAM AND DEALS INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, MR. MOHAMMAD IRSHAD HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT D. NO. 3-125/5 (15), MASIDI, BACKSIDE ROAD, MARAKADA, KAVUR, MANGALORE, DAKSHINA KANNADA 575015 HAVING ITS BRANCH OFFICE AT NO. 48, PID NO. 36-46-48, A DASARAHALLI, WARD NO. 105, MAGADI ROAD, BANGALORE 560079. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SAMARTH PRAKASH., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. VIJAYA TIMES 14, PARK 15, 4TH CROSS ROAD, NEAR ANUBHAV NAGAR, CANARA BANK COLONY, GOVINDARAJA NAGAR WARD, VIJAYNAGAR, BANGALORE-560072. REP BY CHIEF EDITOR. …RESPONDENT Digitally signed by PRAKASH N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26982 WP No. 21141 of 2025 THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT TO REMOVE/ DELETE THE DEFAMATORY VIDEOS/ ARTICLES/ PUBLICATIONS WHICH ARE PLAYED/ AIRED/ TELECASTING AGAINST THE PETITIONER. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV ORAL ORDER The petitioner has sought for issuance of writ of mandamus directing the respondent to remove/delete the defamatory videos/articles/publications which are played/aired/ telecasting 'against the petitioner'. 2. At the time of arguments, it was pointed out that the trial court has passed an order while considering the application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC, in the suit filed by the petitioner against the same respondent who was arrayed as defendant no.48. 3. It is submitted that despite the order of injunction passed, copy of which is produced at Annexure-A, the 48th defendant/respondent is still continuing to allow the uploaded video clip without taking down the same. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26982 WP No. 21141 of 2025 4. Though the prayer of the petitioner is for directions to the respondents, noticing that the respondent herein is defendant no.48 before the trial court, the petition is disposed off, reserving liberty to the petitioner to move the trial court and obtain further directions/clarifications as may be necessary. 5. In light of urgency pleaded, if such application is filed before the trial court, the same to be taken up on priority and endeavor be made to consider the request of the petitioner expeditiously. 6. In light of the court not entering into merits of the matter, notice to the respondent is waived as no prejudicial order is passed against the respondent. Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE NP