Supreme Court Refuses To Entertain Cobrapost's Plea Against Trial Court Allowing Anil Ambani To File Fresh Defamation Suit
The Court asked the newsportal to pursue its pending challenge in the Delhi High Court.
The Supreme Court on Friday declined to entertain a petition filed by news portal Cobrapost challenging a trial court order permitting industrialist Anil Ambani to file a fresh defamation suit after withdrawing his previous suit filed against the portal over its reports alleging that companies linked to him had committed a fraud exceeding ₹41,000 crore.
A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Vipul Pancholi, noting that the petitioner has alternate remedies in civil law, refused to entertain the matter.
Appearing for the petitioner, counsel argued that the trial court had granted liberty to file a fresh suit without hearing Cobrapost, despite the fact that such permission can be granted only under limited circumstances contemplated by Order XXIII of the Code of Civil Procedure.
"He has been granted liberty to file a fresh suit on the same cause of action. Under the Rules there are only two conditions under which this can be granted and I have a right of hearing," the counsel submitted.
The Chief Justice, however, noted that Cobrapost's application seeking recall of the trial court's order was already pending before the High Court.
When the petitioner contended that a fresh suit by Ambani could render its challenge infructuous, the Bench observed that several remedies remained available. The Court pointed out that if a fresh suit were instituted and notice issued, Cobrapost could raise objections regarding its maintainability and the pendency of its challenge before the High Court.
"If your petition is allowed the original suit will stand revived," the CJI remarked, while declining the request to direct that any fresh suit be made subject to the outcome of the pending proceedings before the High Court.
Counsel for Cobrapost also questioned Ambani's conduct in filing the original suit in Delhi. It was argued that Ambani had substantial economic and social ties with Mumbai and that "forum convenience" would have favoured courts there rather than the Karkardooma court in Delhi. The petitioner further contended that the plaint did not quantify damages and that the withdrawal of the suit raised concerns warranting closer scrutiny.
Responding to these submissions, the Chief Justice observed that objections relating to jurisdiction and maintainability would first have to be considered by the civil court if a fresh suit was filed.
"There has to be a reason. There are only two grounds under Order 23," counsel argued, urging the Court to at least direct the High Court to decide the pending challenge within four weeks.
The Bench declined to issue such a direction but stated that the petitioner was at liberty to move an appropriate application before the High Court seeking expeditious disposal of the matter.
Background
The Delhi High Court in 6th April issued notice on a plea filed by news website Cobrapost challenging a trial court order permitting businessman and Chairman of Reliance Group, Anil Ambani to withdraw his defamation case over allegedly defamatory reporting claiming that his companies committed a fraud of over Rs. 41,000 crores.
The High Court sought response of Ambani, Live Media & Publishers Private Limited and Bennet Coleman and listed the matter for hearing on July 13. The portal moved the Supreme Court challenging the High Court's refusal to grant interim relief.
For context, the Court, on November 17, 2025, had dismissed Ambani's application seeking ex parte ad interim injunction against the media outlets. The judge was of the view that the defendants must be given an opportunity to be heard before any restraining order is imposed. Later, the suit was withdrawn.