Madras High Court awards 1.10 crore damages to E Palaniswami in defamation case

The Madras High Court on Thursday allowed a suit filed by AIADMK chief Edappadi K Palaniswami (EPS) seeking damages of ₹1.10 crore from one S Dhanapal for making defamatory allegations against him.

Dhanapal had linked the former Tamil Nadu Chief Minister to an alleged heist and murder at the late J Jayalalithaa’s bungalow in the Nilgiris district back in 2017.

Justice RMT Teekaa Raman restrained Dhanapal, who is the brother of Kanagraj, Jayalalithaa’s former driver and the prime accused in the Kodanad case, from making “any such defamatory statements” against EPS in the future.

“I find on a combine reading of the pleadings in the plaint and evidence, the plaintiff (EPS) is a person in the State of affairs and who held a post of a Chief Minister of State. And making derogatory allegations, particularly, in the electronic media continuously and throwing such allegations in public wide debates will certainly lower the reputation of the public functionary and the same cannot be brushed aside. The words spoken to by the defendant (Dhanapal) make it clear that they are aimed to defame the plaintiff, which admittedly appears to be false, as per his own statement,” the High Court said.

EPS had filed the suit earlier this year claiming that Dhanapal in interviews and social media posts made disparaging comments against him and thus brought disrepute to his public image. He said that Dhanapal had deliberately made the allegations falsely linking EPS to the case after being instigated by the AIADMK’s political rivals.

Counsel for EPS had also argued that Dhanapal was facing criminal charges in a case of financial irregularities and that he was also facing medical ailments for which he was in dire need of money. Therefore, he had made the false allegations against EPS to extort money.

The Court noted that a coordinate bench had issued an ex-parte interim injunction against Dhanapal in September last year. The order was made absolute in October 2023 after Dhanapal failed to file any written submissions to defend himself, or make an appearance before the Court to offer an explanation. He had also not taken any steps to get the interim injunction order set aside, the Court said

“In the absence of any explanation on the side of the defendant to show that there is a valid defence in proving the statements alleged by him against the plaintiff, this Court comes to the conclusion that the statements made in the eye of public by way of various print and electronic media is nothing but targeted to tarnish the image and reputation of the plaintiff,” the High Court said while “decreeing” EPS’ suit.

Justice Raman also lamented the trend of defamatory comments being made on social media, stating,

"It is sorry state of affairs that in the age of social media desecration of reputation of public figure has become child's play. Anyone can open a social media account and thereafter post the messages on the account. Thousands of likes and dislikes are received, however, in the process, the reputation of the man, who is targeted, become sadly, mud..."

The Court further said that since EPS was a public functionary, “no amount of monetary award can truly compensate for damage” caused to his reputation and the ₹1.10 crore claimed by him as damages was only but a “nominal amount.”

Senior Advocate SR Rajagopal and Advocate SR Raghunathan appeared for EPS.

[Read Order]