904.31044.26-IAL.DOC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUIT NO.307 OF 2026 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO.31100 OF 2026 AND INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO.31044 OF 2026 AND INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO.30950 OF 2026 IN SUIT NO.307 OF 2026 Saifee Hospital Trust … Plaintiff Versus Dr. Asiya Khan Luqman & Ors. … Defendants __ Mr. Karl Tamboly with Mr. Tushad Kakalia, Ms. Fatema Kachwalla, Mr. Dishay Chitalia and Ms. Maitri Dedhia i/b. J. Sagar Associates for the Plaintiff Mr. Hersh Choudhary i/b NYAAYA Legal for Defendant No.1 Mr. Alankar Kirpekar a/w. Mr. Ayush Tiwari i/b. Shekhar Bhagat for Defendant No.2 Mr. Rishabh Jaisani with Mr. Harit Lakhani and Mr. Abhishek Mookherjee i/b. Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas for Defendant No.3 Mr. Vijay Hiremath i/b. Swaraj Jadhav for proposed Defendant No.4 CORAM : ARIF S. DOCTOR, J. DATE : 1st OCTOBER 2026 P.C. 1. Learned Counsel for the Plaintiff and Defendant No. 1 have tendered Consent Terms, by which they submit that all differences Basavraj Page| BASAVRAJ GURAPPA PATIL Digitally signed by BASAVRAJ GURAPPA PATIL Date: 2026.10.01 19:11:58 +0530 904.31044.26-IAL.DOC and disputes in the captioned Suit between their respective clients have been amicably resolved in the manner more particularly set out in the consent terms. 2. The execution of the Consent Terms is supported by a Consent Verification Report of the Associate of this Court. The said Consent Verification Report, inter alia, records as follows: “The Consent Terms are signed by the parties out of their free will without any undue influence and coercion. The signatories have admitted the contents of the Consent Terms. Hence, the Consent Terms are duly executed by the signatories.” 3. Hence, Consent Terms having been duly executed, the same are taken on record and marked “X” for identification. 4. Mr. Tamboly has then pointed out that though the Suit was originally filed on account of the defamatory tweets/posts about the Plaintiff which were published by Defendant No. 1, the Plaintiff had to amend the Suit to implead Defendant Nos. 5 to 24 since the offending tweets/publications had either been republished by Defendant Nos. 5 to 24 or then the same defamatory material had been republished in a slightly changed form with certain embellishments added by these Basavraj Page| 904.31044.26-IAL.DOC Defendants. He points out that Defendant Nos 5 to 24, though duly served, have not appeared. 5. Mr. Tamboly has then invited my attention to the tweets/publications made by Defendant Nos. 5 to 24, the relevant URLs of which are set out in Exhibit C-1 to the Plaint. I have perused the same and am satisfied that the said tweets/publications flow entirely from the original tweets/publications of Defendant No. 1, all of which pertain to the Plaintiff-Hospital and all of which, in my view, are per se defamatory of the Plaintiff. These posts therefore also must be taken down, more so when none of the Defendants have so much as even chosen to appear and justify the same. Accordingly, Defendant Nos. 5 to 24 are directed to take down and delete the posts/URLs specified in Exhibit C-1 within 36 hours of being served with a copy of this Order. It is clarified that a copy of this Order may also be served upon the respective social media handlers/platforms on which the said tweets/posts appear. 6. It is further clarified that, in the event that Defendant Nos. 5 to 24 fail to take down and delete the said tweets/posts within the time Basavraj Page| 904.31044.26-IAL.DOC stipulated above, the respective intermediaries, i.e., Respondent Nos. 2 and 3, on whose platforms the said tweets/posts appear, shall take them down forthwith upon being intimated by the Advocate for the Plaintiff of the non-compliance of any of Defendants of this Order. 7. Mr. Tamboly then submits that the Plaintiff would not wish to further precipitate the Suit against Defendant Nos. 2 to 24. The Suit is accordingly disposed of against all the Defendants. 8. The Interim Applications would not survive and are also accordingly disposed of. 9. There shall be no order as to costs. 10. Refund of Court Fees, as per the Rules. 11. Liberty to apply. [ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.] Basavraj Page|