1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR SECOND APPEAL NO.465 OF 2010. (SHRIRAM GOPICHAND KUMBHARE....VS.. KRUSHNAKUMAR CHHATRAPATI DUBEY & OTH.) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Courts orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders and Registrar’s orders. Mr. S.K. Sable, Advocate for Appellant. CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J. DATED : OCTOBER 19, 2010. Heard Mr. Sable, the learned counsel for the appellant. 2. The appellant is the original plaintiff. A suit was instituted by the plaintiff for damages against the defendants. It was the case of the plaintiff that he was the president of Municipal Council, Tiroda and was having high reputation in Tiroda town. The defendants No.1 and 3 were the President and the Secretary of Tiroda Nagar Parishad Karmachari Sangh. According to the plaintiff, the defendant Nos. 1 and 3 instigated and provoked the employees of the union to go on strike as they were not paid their salary for a considerable period. It was pleaded by the plaintiff that on 31.01.1993 the defendant Nos.4 and 5 came in a procession along with other defendants and members of the union with earthen pots and shouted slogans “Murdabad” in front of the house of the plaintiff with a view to tarnish his image. The plaintiffs pleaded that the defendants had extensively published the incident in the daily newspapers. The plaintiff, therefore, sought damages to the tune of Rs. two lacs. 3. The defendants denied the claim of the plaintiff and also denied that the defendant Nos. 4 and 5 had a close association with 2 the defendant Nos.1 and 3. It was denied that the strike was arranged mischievously with a view to harass the plaintiff, who was the newly elected president. It was pleaded that the funds of the Municipal Council were used for other purposes by the then authorities and the employees of the Municipal Council were deprived of their salary for a period of three months. In this background, it was pleaded that defendant Nos. 4 and 5 had led the procession with clean shaven heads in front of the house of the plaintiff. It was, however, denied that some disgraceful slogans or words were uttered by the defendants. It was denied that the defendants had published the story in the news papers with a view to tarnish the image of the plaintiff. 4. The trial Court, on an appreciation of the evidence on record, held that the plaintiff had succeeded in proving that the defendants had defamed him with a view to lower his prestige and reputation in the society. The trial Court held that the plaintiff was entitled to damages of Rs.50,000/- towards defamation and towards mental and physical agony. The first appellate Court, on reappreciation of the evidence on record, came to a conclusion that there was no material on record to show that the defendants arranged the procession, broke the earthen pots and raised the slogans “Murdabad” with a view to cause insult, annoyance and mental harm to the plaintiff. The first appellate Court held that the plaintiff had not proved that the defendants had used any filthy or abusive language and the procession was not arranged with a view to lower the reputation of the plaintiff but with a view to fulfill their legitimate demand regarding payment of arrears of salary. 5. The finding recorded by the first appellate Court is a pure finding of facts based on a proper appreciation of the material 3 evidence on record. It does not give rise to any substantial question of law. The Second Appeal, therefore, fails and is dismissed with no order as to costs. JUDGE RR.