https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312631 In defamation disputes involving public figures and public office, the court noted that prior restraint, takedown, or archiving of social media posts should not be ordered at the interlocutory stage unless the impugned publication is clearly false and the plaintiff satisfies the usual requirements for interim relief. Because the posts related to public affairs and the defendant relied on public records and inquiry material, no interim injunction or takedown direction was granted. The court also treated the verification defect in the written statement as a curable procedural irregularity and held that it should not defeat the defence when the pleading was filed within time; the written statement was allowed to stand with an opportunity to correct the verification. en-us Mon, 07 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 28 Feb 2024 17:45:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312631 In defamation disputes involving public figures and public office, the court noted that prior restraint, takedown, or archiving of social media posts should not be ordered at the interlocutory stage unless the impugned publication is clearly false and the plaintiff satisfies the usual requirements for interim relief. Because the posts related to public affairs and the defendant relied on public records and inquiry material, no interim injunction or takedown direction was granted. The court also treated the verification defect in the written statement as a curable procedural irregularity and held that it should not defeat the defence when the pleading was filed within time; the written statement was allowed to stand with an opportunity to correct the verification. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 07 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312631