Case against savuku sankar cvkj stayed savuku not to telecaste THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS (Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction) C.S. No. of 2022 G Square Realtors Private Limited, Represented by its Authorised Signatory, Mr. N.Vivekanandan, Directing the defendant to pay Rs. 1,00,10,000/- (Rupees One Crore and Ten Thousand only) to the plaintiff as damages together with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of filing of the suit till the date of realisation of the amount;

by Sekar Reporter · Published September 8, 2022 · Updated September 8, 2022

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS (Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction)

C.S. No. of 2022

G Square Realtors Private Limited,

Represented by its Authorised Signatory,

Mr. N.Vivekanandan,

Having its Registered Office at

Flat No.14, 3^rd Floor,

Harrington Apartments,

98, Harrington Road,

Chetpet, Chennai – 600031.

…Plaintiff

Shankar @ Savukku Shankar, aged about 45 years, Son of Achimuthu,

No. 12/6, Sector II,

Z-Type, 1^st Floor, TNHB Flats,

Madurovayal, Chennai- 600 095.

…Defendant

PLAINT FILED UNDER ORDER IV RULE 1 OF O.S. RULES R/W

ORDER VII RULE 1 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, 1908

The plaintiff above-named states as follows:

The plaintiff is G Square Realtors Private Limited, represented by its Authorised Signatory, Mr. N.Vivekanandan, having its Registered Office at Flat No.14, 3rd Floor, Harrington Apartments, 98, Harrington Road, Chetpet, Chennai – 600031, within the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court.

The address for service of all summons and processes on the plaintiff is that of its counsel, M/s. K.Surendar and Chenthoori Pugazendhi, Advocates, having office at No.7/5, Parameswari Nagar 4^th Street, Adyar, Chennai – 600 020.

The defendant is Mr. Shankar @ Savukku Shankar, son of Achimuthu, aged about 45 years, residing at No. 12/6, Sector II, ZType, 1^st Floor, TNHB Flats, Madurovayal, Chennai- 600 095, within the jurisdiction of the Learned District Munsif, Ambathur.

The address for service of all summons and processes on the defendant is as set forth above.

The Plaintiff is a Company, incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1956 on 12^th October, 2012 and has its registered office at Flat No.14, 3rd Floor, Harrington Apartments, 98, Harrington Road, Chetpet, Chennai – 600031, within the ordinary original territorial jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court. The Plaintiff is engaged in the business of real estate development and has been carrying on its business under the brand-name, ‘G Square’, along with other Group entities, commonly referred to as ‘G Square Group’. Over the last ten years, the plaintiff has earned an impeccable reputation and goodwill, among the general public.

The plaintiff has an esteemed clientele and has delivered over 1000 acres of land to reputed business enterprises like Indiabulls, Murugappa Group, JK Tyres, etc. The plaintiff has its business activities spread across Chennai, Bengaluru, Hyderabad, Coimbatore, Trichy, Hosur, Mysore & Ballari. The Plaintiff has been accredited with awards such as ‘Best Luxurious Plotted Developer’ and ‘Best Plotted Development of the Year’ by the Times Business Awards and is considered to be the South India’s No. 1 Real Estate Developer. The plaintiff also undertakes works of Corporate Social Responsibility and organises various environmental and developmental programmes which has a tremendous reach.
The plaintiff further states that it has about 645 direct employees and has created indirect employment opportunities to more than 1500 persons, thereby providing livelihood for more than 2145 families. Besides, through the real estate transactions done by the plaintiff over the years, a total sum of more than Rs.125 Crores has been paid as Stamp Duty alone and more than Rs.100 Crores has been paid as taxes. Thus, the plaintiff has been a major contributor to the economy of the nation.

The Plaintiff understands that the defendant is a lower division clerk under suspension in the Department of Vigilance and AntiCorruption, Government of Tamil Nadu and a self-proclaimed journalist. The defendant is in the habit of posting slanderous and malicious videos and articles on social media platforms as against various individuals, corporate entities, state machineries as well as the Judiciary, with unfounded and imaginary allegations. Portraying himself as a whistle-blower, the defendant seems to crave for negative publicity by publishing derogatory and defamatory imputations without any responsibility or restraint. The plaintiff understands that although the defendant’s website was blocked pursuant to the directions issued by this Hon’ble Court, he has been continuing to stage his unlawful activities by creating proxy websites and through social media such as ‘YouTube’ and ‘Twitter’. It further appears that this Hon’ble Court has also initiated contempt proceedings as against the defendant for publishing unscrupulous remarks against the Judiciary.

The Plaintiff submits that the instant suit has occasioned on account of the false and defamatory statements made by the defendant as against the Plaintiff, which have been published in

‘Youtube’ and ‘Twitter’. At the behest of disgruntled elements and

for reasons of animosity, the defendant has been regularly giving interviews to various Youtube Channels by falsely accusing and making defamatory statements against the Plaintiff. That apart, the defendant is using his Twitter platform, with the Twitter handle, @veera284 to post contents that are patently demeaning and derogatory, against the Plaintiff. Knowing it to be false, the defendant is engaged in such an activity with the sole intention to tarnish the goodwill and reputation and gain cheap popularity.

The Plaintiff states that on 24^th May, 2022, the defendant has given an interview, which has been published in ‘YouTube’ at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Hgk4rYy1iw. In the said video, the defendant has made a false allegation that the money lying with the plaintiff belongs to one, Anna Nagar, Karthi. After reiterating the said statement repeatedly in the said video, the defendant has stated that he would face the litigation that follows the statement. These allegations are filled with falsities and are per se defamatory. The ill-motivated statements made against the plaintiff are baseless and have gravely affected the reputation of the plaintiff.

Thereafter, on 24^th August, 2022, another video has been released featuring the defendant’s interview in ‘YouTube’ at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5k4cdmudVBU&. In the said video, the defendant has claimed that wherever G Square has its business, the Government would introduce welfare schemes in the said locality. This was made in furtherance of a false allegation that the Government had proposed to change the location of Coimbatore Bus Stand from Vellaloor to L&T Bypass Road since there was a project of G Square in L&T Bypass Road. It is highly inconceivable and blatantly false since all the plots in the said project were sold

in March, 2022, whereas, the announcement by the Government was made only in August, 2022. To this effect, on 21.08.2022, the defendant has also made defamatory statements in his twitter page and the same is reproduced hereunder:

10. Further, in the same video,	i.e.,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5k4cdmudVBU&,	the

defendant has stated that the plaintiff is finalising two projects in Achipati and Echanari, Pollachi District, where the Government had conducted a function in the same place. However, the fact remains that the plaintiff does not have any project in the said places. Without verifying the facts and knowing fully well that it would harm the reputation of the plaintiff, the defendant had been continuously engaging himself in such gross and demeaning insinuations against the plaintiff. For instance, the defendant, on 23.08.2022, had published a defamatory post in Twitter suggesting that the government projects would be introduced to boost the value of the plaintiff’s real estate and the said publications are extracted hereunder.

The Plaintiff submits that on 22.08.2022, the defendant has given a defamatory interview which has been published in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Q_eWqP–5MU. In the said video, the defendant has suggested that the plaintiff has received funds through illegal means and that the plaintiff Company was incorporated only to convert black money into white money. In addition to such serious imputations, the defendant has further alleged that the Government had shifted the location of bus stand to help the plaintiff. Besides the same, the defendant has also published such false allegation in his twitter page, which is reproduced hereunder.

The Plaintiff submits that in the said defamatory video, the defendant has fabricated a theory as if in 2016, the Founder-cum- Managing Director of the plaintiff, Mr. Ramajayam did not have even Rs. 20,00,000/- and that now he runs an entity worth of Rs. 2000 crores. The defendant has further stated that one, Mr. Sabarisan had funded the plaintiff. The conduct of the defendant is highly malicious and the defamatory publications are made with an intention to oust the customers of the plaintiff.

The defendant clearly seeks to gain attention by raising frivolous allegations and thereby increase his viewership in the social media. In the defamatory interview referred to above, the defendant has questioned, “Has G Square grown through hard work like that of Ratan Tata? Who is Ramajayam?”. Further, the defendant has stated, “I will not allow these companies to happily conduct business”. The personal animosity and callous attitude of the defendant is evidently exhibited in these statements.
The plaintiff further states that on 25.08.2022, the defendant has published defamatory posts in his Twitter page at https://twitter.com/Veera284/status/1562673853729366016. In this post, the defendant has stated that the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu has participated in a Government Event at Erode; that the venue chosen originally belonged to Sakthi Infratex Group, a subsidiary of Eastman Exports Global Clothing Private Ltd; that G Square approached the Sakthi Infratex Group and asked them to sell the land; that if agreed, the Chief Minister would come for the meeting in the avenue for increasing the value of the land and; that the Chief Minister is the brand ambassador for the plaintiff Company. The said malicious post is reproduced hereunder.

The plaintiff further states that the defendant has published yet another defamatory post on 27.08.2022, with the intention to cause irreparable harm to the reputation and goodwill of the plaintiff, in his Twitter page at

https://twitter.com/Veera284/status/1563383304597819395, which is reproduced hereunder.

The plaintiff submits that the above allegations of the defendant in the videos and twitter posts are made with an oblique motive to defame the plaintiff and ruin its goodwill and reputation. Needless to state that none of the allegations are supported with any sort of evidence. The defendant has been habituated to make a living out of such sensational and falsified news, so as to gain viewership. The defendant has foisted various false allegations and has attempted to gain publicity. The defamatory publications made by the defendant are enlisted in the schedule mentioned hereunder and the list is not exhaustive and are only those within the plaintiff’s knowledge at the moment.

The plaintiff submits that the videos and posts of the defendant has got widespread circulation and the viewership of the said video publications range from at least 40,000 to 9,00,000. Rumours like these spread like wildfire in the social medial platform. By way of these false interviews, tweets, messages, stories and posts, the plaintiff has been deliberately projected as an outlaw in the eyes of the general public. It is evident that the defendant has made such publications to tarnish the reputation and credibility of the plaintiff with an ulterior motive, for his personal advantage.

The Plaintiff states that by maligning the reputation and portraying the image of the Plaintiff as unscrupulous law-breakers, the defendant has spitefully subjected the plaintiff to hatred, contempt and ridicule. It is on account of the scandalous allegations, the customers who have made their booking have cancelled and the plaintiff was constrained to refund the amount. The plaintiff over 10 years has never faced such a financial crunch. This has resulted in loss of customers and monetary loss to the plaintiff. The loss is directly attributable to the defamatory statements made by the defendant. From May, 2022, there are about 28 cancellations resulting in loss to the tune of about Rs. 15,16,00,000/-. Further, the plaintiff was constrained to refund a sum of Rs. 76,96,046/- to its customers pursuant to cancellation of transactions following the defendant’s defamatory publications.

The plaintiff submits that the defendant has defamed the plaintiff without any lawful justification causing huge loss to the reputation and goodwill of plaintiff and hindering its future growth prospects. Clearly, the defendant has no respect for any rule of law and believes in creating chaos. The defendant has been repeatedly publishing incorrect and unsubstantiated information, with an intention to defame the plaintiff. In fact, the Madurai Bench of this Hon’ble Court has initiated suo-moto contempt proceedings against the defendant in Suo Moto Cont. P. 1124/2022 for posting tweets and giving interview to Youtube channels that scandalize and lower the image of judiciary. The plaintiff has suffered irreparably and estimates the damage at more than Rs. 100 crores and the defendant is liable to duly indemnify the plaintiff. However for the purposes of this suit, the plaintiff restricts its claim for damages at Rs. 1,00,10,000/- (Rupees one crore and ten thousand only). The Plaintiff states that the actions of the defendant ex-facie attracts the provisions of Section 499 and 500 of the Indian Penal Code. The Plaintiff reserves its right to initiate appropriate criminal prosecution as against the defendant.

The cause of action for instituting the above suit arose at Chennai, within the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court, where the plaintiff has its registered office and carrying on its business, where the defamatory videos and statements as against the plaintiff have been published and circulated amongst the general public through social media and cyber space; where the goodwill and reputation of the plaintiff has been tarnished due to the defamatory imputations made by the defendant; on 24.05.2022, 22.08.2022 and 24.08.2022 when the videos containing defamatory statement made by the defendant were published in ‘YouTube’ and on 21.08.2022, 22.08.2022, 23.08.2022, 25.08.2022 and 27.08.2022 when the defendant posted defamatory statements in ‘Twitter’ and on all other dates when the defamatory videos and tweets published by the defendant have been made available in the online portals, causing harm and injury to the good will and reputation of the plaintiff.

The plaintiff values the suit for the purpose of court fee and jurisdiction at Rs. 1,00,12,000/- as provided in the memo of valuation below and pays a court fee of Rs. 3,00,360/- under Sections 22 and 27(c) of the Tamil Nadu Court Fee and Suit Valuation Act, 1955:

MEMO OF VALUATION

VALUE FOR PRAYER (A) : Court fees paid thereon under	Rs. 1,00,10,000/-
Section 22 of Tamil Nadu Court Fees : And Suit Valuation Act, 1955	Rs. 3,00,300/-
VALUE FOR PRAYER (B) : Court fees paid thereon under	Rs.	1,000/-
Section 27(c) of Tamil Nadu Court Fees : And Suit Valuation Act, 1955	Rs.	30/-
VALUE FOR PRAYER (C) : Court fees paid thereon under	Rs.	1,000/-
Section 27(c) of Tamil Nadu Court Fees : And Suit Valuation Act, 1955	Rs.	30/-
Total Value of the suit :	Rs. 1,00,12,000/-
Total Court fees paid	: Rs. 3,00,360/-

The plaintiff therefore pray for a Judgement and Decree against the defendant:

Directing the defendant to pay Rs. 1,00,10,000/- (Rupees One Crore and Ten Thousand only) to the plaintiff as damages together with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of filing of the suit till the date of realisation of the amount;

For a permanent injunction restraining the defendant, his agents, servants, employees, or anyone claiming under or through him, either directly or indirectly, from making, printing, writing, posting, publishing any defamatory allegations and slanderous material about the plaintiff or its management in newsprint, electronic or any other media;

For a mandatory injunction directing the defendant to remove and delete the schedule mentioned defamatory videos and tweets;

Directing the defendant to pay the costs of this suit and;

pass such other order as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and render justice.