IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 24TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 3RD AGRAHAYANA 1933 RSA.No. 885 of 2011() --------------------- AS.175/2006 of ADDL.DISTRICT COURT (ADHOC), KOTTAYAM OS.291/2000 of PRL.SUB COURT,KOTTAYAM .................... APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF -------------------- MATHEW SKARIA, S/O. MATHEW, KARITHAKARICKAL HOUSE, LAIKATTU AMBOORI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.J.THOMAS RESPONDENT(S)/APPELLANTS/DEFENDANTS: --------------- 1. THE KERALA KAUMUDI LTD, KAUMUDI BUILDINGS THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 024, REP, BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR. 2. M.S.RAVI, MANAGING DIRECTOR, PRINTER AND PUBLISHER, KERALA KAUMUDI LIMITED, K.P.R. BUILDINGS, THIRUVAMBADY STATION ROAD, ALAPPUZHA. THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J ........................................... RSA No.885 of 2011 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 24th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2011 JUDGMENT Plaintiff in O.S.291 of 2000 on the file of Munsiff Court, Kottayam is the appellant. Defendants are the respondents. Suit was filed claiming damages alleging that respondents published in their newspaper, Kerala Kaumudi daily having wide circulations inside and outside Kerala, a news item with the evil intention of causing defamation to the appellant and his family. The allegation is that the news published in Kerala Kaumudi regarding the death of the son of the appellant that he committed suicide by consuming poison after being questioned in a criminal case involving necrophilia, being investigated by the Crime Branch. It is alleged that the news item lowered the reputation of the appellant and his family among the public. 2. Respondents resisted the suit contending that the news item was published in good faith after due verification without any intention to spoil the reputation of the appellant or his family and similar reports appeared in other newspapers also and hence RSA 885/2011 2 the suit is to be dismissed. 3. Learned Munsiff, on the evidence finding that the publication of the news item is defamatory to the appellant and his family, granted a compensation of Rs.50,000/- with interest. Respondents challenged the decree before District Court, Kottayam in A.S.175 of 2006. Learned District Judge on re- appreciation of the evidence, found that Saji, son of appellant, admittedly committed suicide but the defamatory statement published in the Kerala Kaumudi daily does not show that the person referred therein is the son of the appellant and therefore held that appellant or his family did not suffer any loss of reputation and in any case, appellant did not establish that respondents have any intention to tarnish the reputation of the appellant. Appeal was allowed and the decree granted by the trial court was set aside and the suit was dismissed. It is challenged in the second appeal. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant was heard. Learned counsel made available copy of Ext.A5, Kerala Kaumudi newspaper dated 5.10.1988. The disputed news item was published in the front page of the daily with bold headlines, in RSA 885/2011 3 four columns. It is to the effect that the youth was questioned by police as he was one among the suspect in the crime. The report is that in the crime being investigated by the Crime Branch police, a youth by name Saji, who was earlier working as a cook with a Priest at Kurumbanadu was questioned by police. His blood and semen were taken for examination. He was sent back by the police informing that if necessary, he will have to be called again. He committed suicide there. The identity of the person shown is Saji(28), residing at Layikkadu Amboori. Learned counsel submitted that there cannot be a dispute with regard to the identity and therefore the finding of the first appellate court is not correct. 5. Even if it is taken that reference is about the son of the appellant, the question is whether the publication would lower the reputation of either the appellant or his family. Even if the entire statements in the newspaper is read as a whole, I cannot agree with the submission of the learned counsel that it would amount to a defamatory statement. The only statement is that Saji was questioned by police and he was one of the suspect and his blood and semen were taken and though he was sent back, police RSA 885/2011 4 informed him that it may be necessary to question him. Later he committed suicide. There is no allegation that the said Saji was the person who committed the offence. On the other hand, a reading of the news item, especially the last portion shows that the correspondent wanted to convey the apprehension that police will close the case showing Saji, who is no more, as an accused, which itself establish that there was no imputation that Saji committed the offence. Even in the earlier portion what was alleged is only that a news was spread that Saji was responsible for the incident. When this is read with the last portion of the news, the message conveyed is that it was not Saji Amboori, who committed the offence but somebody else and the police would close the investigation as Saji is no more. In such circumstances, I find no substantial question of law involved in the appeal. Appeal is dismissed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE lgk