Actor Vadivelu moves Madras High Court seeking damages of ₹5 crore from Singamuthu

Popular Tamil film comedian S.N. Vadivelu has filed a civil suit in the Madras High Court seeking damages of ₹5 crore from actor K.R. Singamuthu for having reportedly made false and defamatory allegations against him in interviews given to various YouTube channels this year.

Popular Tamil film comedian S.N. Vadivelu has filed a civil suit in the Madras High Court seeking damages of ₹5 crore from actor K.R. Singamuthu for having reportedly made false and defamatory allegations against him in interviews given to various YouTube channels this year.

Considering the nature of the case, Justice RMT. Teekaa Raman allowed an application, filed by Mr. Vadivelu along with the suit, seeking the leave of the court to institute the suit for damages in the High Court, though Mr. Singamuthu resides outside its territorial jurisdiction.

Since the comedian had also taken out another application for an interim injunction restraining the defendant from making further defamatory allegations related to his personal and professional life, the judge ordered notice, returnable by two weeks, on that application.

The plaintiff said he had been acting in Tamil cinema since 1991 and has more than 300 movies to his credit. He created a niche for himself by becoming one of the most sought-after comedians whose memes continue to be popular on social media.

He also stated to have collaborated with Mr. Singamuthu in many movies since 2000 and that their combination had been a big hit. However, the relationship between them soured in 2015 and since then, the latter had been making personal comments against him in public fora, the plaintiff complained.

Mr. Vadivelu urged the court to issue a permanent injunction restraining Mr. Singamuthu from indulging in “character assassination” by speaking about the plaintiff’s personal and professional life and also to direct him to pay a compensation of ₹5 crore for the damage already caused.

Until the disposal of the main suit, he sought an interim injunction restraining the defendant from “communicating, discussing, speaking or publishing any defamatory or false information or statement or allegation against the applicant relating to his personal or professional life.”