The Court said that while Bindra failed to prove strong prima facie case warranting interim mandatory injunction against Maheshwari, he does have a case to the extent that any defamatory remarks, imputation or accusation can cause huge loss to his business and reputation.
“Both the plaintiff (Bindra) and defendant No.1 (Maheshwari) are renowned youtubers. Any of their videos or posts on the social media certainly induces great number of youth following them. Therefore, to rest the controversy, both the plaintiff and defendant No.1 are restrained from uploading any defamatory/ disparaging video or posts over social media or any other online and off line mode against each other. Accordingly, stay application stands partly allowed,” the Court ordered.
However, the Court also held that Bindra failed to prove that Maheshwari’s video (where he raised questions on Bindra’s business model) was uploaded with malice.
“He (Bindra) has not even denied the business model/schemes discussed in the video and has not disclosed his actual business models/schemes in his plaint. He was supposed to specify any imputation or allegations in the video which is defamatory and false. However, plaintiff failed to point out the same. At this stage, there is nothing on record which may suggest that impugned Video dated 11.12.2023 contains any false and defamatory contents against the plaintiff.”
Source: Barandbench
