The Karnataka High Court allowed a writ petition filed by Google India Pvt. Ltd., setting aside an earlier trial court order that had refused to remove the company from a defamation suit filed by a private individual. The High Court concluded that Google India was wrongly arrayed as a party, given the absence of any specific allegations linking it to the alleged defamatory content.
Justice Vijaykumar A. Patil, presiding over the matter, held that there were no clear pleadings or material in the plaint to show that Google India had published, posted, or broadcasted any defamatory material about the plaintiff. The Court found that the plaint failed to disclose the nature, source, or details of the alleged defamatory content and did not establish any direct involvement of Google India.
The respondent had originally filed a suit seeking a permanent injunction against multiple defendants including Google India for allegedly broadcasting derogatory material affecting her reputation across websites, channels, and newspapers. Google India moved an application under Order I Rule 10(2) CPC seeking deletion from the suit, arguing that:
It was a distinct legal entity, incorporated in India, and not the owner of Google LLC or YouTube.
There were no specific defamatory allegations or evidence pointing to Google India’s role in content dissemination.
It merely functioned as a non-exclusive reseller of advertising space in India and provided technical support, which was not related to the subject matter of the suit.
Citing the Supreme Court’s judgment in M.J. Zakharia Sait v. T.M. Mohammed, (1990) 3 SCC 396 and other precedents, the High Court held that a plaint alleging defamation must clearly specify the defamatory content, the publisher, and the context, which were lacking in this case. The Court also referred to previous similar orders passed by trial courts, where Google India had been deleted from suits based on similar reasoning.
Finding that Google India had no actionable role or involvement in the alleged defamation and was wrongly conflated with Google LLC (USA) and YouTube (also a distinct entity), the Court allowed the petition. The impugned trial court order dated 11.02.2019 was set aside, and Google India was ordered to be deleted from the array of parties.
The Court did not pass any order as to costs.
Appearances:Â
Petitioner: Sri Mrinal Shankar Adv. Sri Aditya Vikram Bhat
Respondent: Sri Akarsh Kanade, Adv