2018 M L D 999
[Balochistan (Turbat Bench)]
Before Abdullah Baloch and Muhammad Hashim Khan Kakar, JJ
GHULAM QADIR and another ---Appellants
Versus
MUHAMMAD ALI and others ---Respondents
R.F.A. No. 47 of 2014, decided on 12th January, 2018. Defamation Ordinance (LVI of 2002) ---
----S. 3---Suit for defamation and damages, dismissal of ---Professional/ habitual litigant---
Requirement of damage to reputation not proved---Plaintiffs (advocates) filed a suit for
defamation against the defendants al leging that they published certain material in newspapers
wherein serious allegations were levelled against the plaintiffs to damage their honour in the eyes of society ---Said suit was dismissed by the Trial Court; held, that perusal of subject
publications did not reveal any material causing damage of reputation and humiliation to the plaintiffs ---After publication of such material the plaintiffs did not make any effort to rebut
the same---Record also showed that the plaintiffs and defendants were involved in certain
other litigation ---Moreover the concerned District Judge of the area had issued a list of
advocates who were involved in frivolous litigation, and the name of one of the plaintiffs appeared in such list ---Trial Court had rightly dismissed the s uit of the plaintiffs ---Appeal
was dismissed accordingly.
Mehrab Khan Gichki for Appellants.
Abdul Hameed Baloch for Respondents.
Date of hearing: 7th December, 2017.
JUDGMENT
ABDULLAH BALOCH, J. ---This judgment disposes of R.F.A No.47 of 2014 filed
by the appellants Ghulam Qadir son of Murad and Abdul Qadir son of Ghulam Qadir, against
the judgment and decree dated 20th February 2014 (hereinafter referred as, "the impugned judgment and decree") passed by the learned District Judge, Gwadar, (hereinafter referred as, "the trial Court"), whereby suit filed by the appellants/plaintiffs for defamation and damages has been dismissed.
2. Brief facts arising from the instant appeal are that the appellants/ plaintiffs filed a suit
for defamation and damages in sum of Rs.20,000,000/ - under the Defamations Ordinance,
2002 against the respondents/defendants in the Court of District Judge, Mekran at Turbat with the averments that the appellants/plaintiffs are respectful citizen of Gwadar and connected with the profe ssion of Zamindari, business, social work and appellant/plaintiff
No.2 is also connected with the profession of Journalism. It is further submitted by the
appellants/plaintiffs that they are also looking after the fundamental rights, education, health
and social problems of the area and having well reputation in the society, but due to jealously
with connivance of respondent No.1 a campaign was lunched against the appellants, which resulted different publications in newspapers, wherein serious allegations l evelled against the
appellants just to damage their honour in the eyes of society, which resulted damage and defamation of the reputation and honour of the appellants in the society. It is further submitted despite approach the respondents have not apologi zed for their act, which entitled
the appellants to receive damages on account of their defamation.
3. The suit of the appellants/plaintiffs was contested by the respondents/defendants by
means of filing written statement, respondent Nos.1 to 5 have filed their joint written
statements while respondent No.6 filed its written statements separately and all the
respondents/ defendants vehemently denied the claim of the appellants. Rather leveled further allegations against the appellants/plaintiffs that the ap pellants belongs to a group of habitual
litigants, black mailers and also declared habitual professional litigants by the learned
Sessions Judge, Mekran at Turbat and having no good reputation in the society.
4. Out to the pleadings of the parties the lear ned trial Court framed as many as following
issues:
"1. Whether the advertisement published in daily Mashriq (Hub), daily Eagle
(Hub) and daily Intikhab (Hub) caused serious damage to the reputation and honour of plaintiffs in the society?
2. Whether the p laintiffs are professional litigants and are involved in a criminal
and civil litigants, if so to what effect?
3. Whether the Editor of daily Intikhab (Hub) has fired/expelled his employee from service after publication of advertisement against the, plaint iffs, if so to
what effect?
4. Whether plaintiffs are entitle for the damages claimed for?
3(sic) Relief?"
5. To substantiate their case the appellants/plaintiffs produced four (04) PWs and also
recorded the statement of their attorney. In rebuttal the respondents/defendants produced three DWs and also attorney of respondent/defendant No.6 as well as attorneys of rest of the respondents.
6. After recording the evidence and hearing the parties, the learned trial Court had
dismissed the suit o f the appellants/plaintiffs.
7. The learned counsel for the appellants/plaintiffs contended that the impugned
judgment and decree passed by the learned trial Court suffers from misreading, non -reading
and mis -appreciation of evidence; that the learned trial Court also failed to discuss each and
every issues to its true perspectives, which resulted in grave miscarriage of justice; that the appellants are lawful, respectable citizen of Pakistan having good reputation in the society, due to the act of responde nts their reputation and honour was badly damaged in the society,
but the learned trial Court failed to consider this important aspects of the case; that the appellants/ plaintiffs produced confidence inspiring evidence in support of their claim, but the
learned trial Court did not given weight to the evidence of the appellants; that there are
material illegalities and irregularities in the impugned, which is not sustainable and liable to
be dismissed.
8. Conversely, the learned counsel for the respondents have vehemently opposed the
arguments so advanced by the learned counsel for the appellants and contended that infact the
appellants belongs to habitual litigants and by garb of their profession, they are always filing false litigations against the peoples of the area just to harass and blackmail the people and to
avail benefit from them; that there are civil litigation have already been exits between the appellants and respondent No.1 while the respondents Nos.2 to 6 are related with the profession of Jour nalism and also belongs to well leading daily newspapers and do not
imagine to humiliate any human being including the appellants. They further contended that the publication advertisements so published in the newspaper against the appellants are purely in private capacity and there is no concerned of the Editors with such publication.
Even otherwise, the publication so made in the newspaper does not disclose any manipulated
false material, which damage the reputation of appellants, they further contended t hat the
reputation of both the appellants could be adjudged from the resolution of Mekran Bar
Association as well as order of learned District Judge, Mekran at Turbat, wherein the
appellants were declared as habitual litigants. In view of the above, the ap pellants are not
entitled to claim damages and the learned trial Court had rightly dismissed the suit of the
appellants.
9. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record minutely.
The moot question between the parties revolved ar ound the recovery of damages on account
of defamation, as such, it would be appropriate prior to dilating upon the case of parties
firstly to understand the defamation as defined in Defamation Ordinance, 2002 under section 3 is reproduced as under;
"Defama tion. (1) Any wrongful act or publication or circulation of a false statement
or representation made orally or in written or visual from which injuries the reputation of a person, tends to lower him in the estimation of others or tends to reduce him to ridicule, unjust criticism, dislike, contempt or hatred shall be actionable as
defamation.
(2) Defamation is of two forms, namely: ---
(i) Slander: and
(ii) libel.
(3) Any false oral statement or representation that amounts to defamation shall be actionable as slander.
(4) Any false written, documentary or visual statement or representation made either by ordinary form or expression or by electronic or other modern means of devices that amounts to defamation shall be actionable as libel."
10. In view of the above provisions of law, we would like to evaluate the claim of the
appellants. The basic phenomena and concept of the defamation mainly based on existing of such element in its original condition and thereafter if the same thing has been broken,
damaged and disturbed by an act of opponent side deliberately and intentionally then of
course the owner of the such element could be entitled to claim damages of the said item.
11. Now adverting to the claim of the appellants, wherein it was claimed by the appella nts
that they are lawful citizen and Zamindar having agriculture lands and business of stationary, photocopy, repairing of computer as well as appellant No.2 is a social worker and the appellants having good reputation and respectful citizen and the case o f the appellants with
regard to their profession and reputation around the parameters of about states stated claim.
12. While on the other hand, the appellants claimed that their above stated
status/reputation was damaged by the act of respondents while ma king certain advertisements
of respondent No.1 namely Muhammad Ali published in the newspaper of the respondent Nos.5 to 6. The perusal of above stated publication (advertisement) reflects that the respondent No.1 on behalf of the inhabitants of colony of New Town Gwadar made an appeal
to the worthy president of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, Prime Minister, Governor
Balochistan, Provincial Chief Minister Balochistan, and Revenue Minister Balochistan on the
subject that whereof as under: --
م� �ا
" ب �� ف� ل� ن�پا � ر� ب� ۤب� ت�
ب�� ىزر�� �� ن�پا � �ىر ا�ب وز� ۤب� ت�
ب�� � �ن او�� �ر� ب� ۤب� ت�
ب�� �� � م� ن�� ٰ�ىرا �ب وز� ۤب� ت�
ب��� د� �� ��ىر ر � وز�با�� ب� ۤب� ت�
��� ن�� در� م� �در و�ا� اد اور� �در و� م� � � ارش�
� � ���بار � زر��ى ا�ا� �� �ر� ت اور� ارا�� رى�� � ادر�
��ارى و د�رد� �� � ئزر
��زا� � �� ورت� � ل�پارك اور ا � � ں�
زذا� � � � بار�ل زر�ى ا�ا� �� � ص�رہ ا�� � � �ر ا� ا�بزذر�
۔�� ىا �� پارك �� � �� � ں� �تا� �� ىا�ا� �� � ت� ارا� ادر� ���
"ادر� ٹاوٗن� � و��� ن�رى وا� � � : بزب�
13. It is pertinent to mention here that the above publication was appeared in the
newspaper of the respondents Nos.5 to 6, but no rebuttal whereof appeared from the side of
appellants and prima facie from the perusal of contents of above publication no material of damages of reputation and humil iation would arise. Even otherwise, according to the
statements of both sides it was categorically appeared and admitted that there are certain litigations are/were also pending in between appellants and respondent No.1
14. While on the other hand, the per usal of record reflects that and it was also brought on
record that with regard to the reputation of appellants that the District Bar Association
Mekran at Turbat passed a resolution unanimously bearing the signatures of 16 Advocates including the learned counsel for the appellants dated 17.01.2003, wherein a letter Ex.P/3- A
along with Ex.P/3- B addressed to the District and Sessions Judge, Turbat against the
professional attorneys to be restrained for being attorney on basis of fake power of attorneies and list whereof also attached and Ex.P/3 -D containing the name of appellant No.1 Ghulam
Qadir is one among the professional attorney. It is pertinent to mention here that the appellant
No.2 Abdul Qadir is also son of appellant No.1 Ghulam Qadir consequence whereupon such
application the District Judge, Mekran issued a list of attorneies, wherein declared them as
professional attorneies, the name of the appellant No.1 Ghulam Qadir appearing at Serial No.15 being a professional attorney of Qazi Court Gwadar.
From the bare perusal of the above declaration of the learned District and Sessions
Judge, Turbat, wherein the appellant No.1 father appellant No.2 was categorically declared as professional attorney being involved in a frivolous litigations and the said index issued by the learned District and Sessions Judge, Mekran at Turbat i.e. 24.09.2003 is still in the field and nowhere assailed by the appellant No.1, as such, issue No.2 was proved against the appellants.
In view of the above, there is no need of further discussion of rest of the issues with
regard to the well reputation of the appellants, as such, the learned trial Court after proper appreciation of evidence had rightly dismissed the suit of the appellants. The learned counsel for the appellants failed to point out any illegality or irregularity in the impugned judgment
and decree.
For the forgoing reasons, the appeal is devoid of merits and hereby dismissed with no
order as to cost.
MWA/20/Bal. Appeal dismisse dThis judgment is reproduced from a publicly available source for informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. If you believe this listing contains an error,
let us know.