Salman Khan's claim of being defamed doesn’t hold as neighbour has proof, says Mumbai court

Mumbai court didn’t accept Salman Khan’s claim of being defamed by his neighbour, Ketan Kakkad. On the other hand, Kakkad submitted documentary proof to support his allegations that Khan had stopped him from approaching his land.

The Mumbai civil court has held that the allegations made by Salman Khan's neighbour, Ketan Kakkad, which the actor claimed were defamatory, were in fact deduced to be true. The court based its order on the documentary evidence provided by Kakkad which showed Khan restrained him from approaching his land. The court had passed the order last week, but it is only now that the order has been made available.

Judge AH Laddhad of the Mumbai sessions court said, "I am of the view that Khan failed to explain innuendo how it relates to him, and Kakkad raised the plea of justification which is prima facie supported by documentary evidence." It is with this that the court rejected the injunction application that the actor was seeking against his NRI neighbour.

The order states that in order to substantiate the allegations of Khan restraining Kakkad from approaching his land, there is documentary proof to that effect.

Khan's prayer was that pending the hearing and final disposal of the suit, the court should pass an order in direction against Kakkad and others, restraining them by a temporary order from posting and circulating any defamatory content. Khan's contention was that the defamatory content is absolutely inter­alia provocative, unsubstantiated, false and malicious in nature as same is made with a view to defame, malign and disrepute him. It was contented that there is no shred of truth in the defamatory content.

Kakkad's arguments were put forth in the court by advocates Abha Singh and Aditya Pratap who said that Kakkad has his land on a hill above the farmland owned by Khan in Panvel. She added that it is being blocked by Khan by putting an iron gate. Kakkad had not been able to rightfully access his land since 2014 when he permanently came back to India from the United States to live a retired life due to the encumbrances caused by Khan and his family, submitted Singh. Singh said that earlier Khan used to invite Kakkad to his farmhouse for having evening pleasantries, and in turn, used Kakkad’s land for jogging and fishing from the stream adjacent to the land. However, things changed when Kaklad shifted back to India, said Singh.

"Kakkad was not given right of way to visit his own temple and also was not even granted any sort of electricity for light, let alone a bulb by the said authorities of the area," Singh had argued in court while further adding that Kakkad has approached all the departments for his grievances like the Forest Department and has also filed complaints and FIRs and due inquiry is instituted. "The cases are also pending before the respective courts," said Singh. Singh had also pointed out that Kakkad would also give a disclaimer after giving interviews and that he has not spoken about things that he did not know.

Judge Laddhad noted that the only point "which comes first for determination is, whether Kakkad prima facie made out a defense for justification and the pleadings of the plaint are according to the requirement of law, and, whether the imputations are per se defamatory. After going through Kakkad's submissions, Judge Laddhad said, "Kakkad has put specific material and came up with the defence of justification."