Thane court rejects plea by Rahul Gandhi for transfer of defamation suit filed by RSS activist

A district court in Maharashtra's Thane has rejected the application filed by Congress leader Rahul Gandhi seeking transfer of the defamation suit filed against him by a Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) activist to another court [Rahul Gandhi vs Vivek Champanerkar]..The order was passed by Principal District Judge AJ Mantri in December last year though the copy of the same was uploaded only today. The Court was seized of an application filed by Gandhi under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) seeking to transfer the defamation suit filed against him and Communist Party of India (Marxist) leader Sitaram Yechury by Vivek Champanerkar for allegedly blaming RSS for the murder of noted journalist Gauri Lankesh.The suit filed by Champanerkar is pending before a Civil Judge, Senior Division. However, Gandhi sought the same to be transferred to Civil Judge, Junior Division on the ground that the compensation sought by the plaintiff was below ₹5 lakh.Judge Mantri noted in his order that Gandhi has filed the present application on the ground of valuation."If applicant (Gandhi) is having any grievance or objection about the maintainability of the suit before the senior division judge on the ground of pecuniary jurisdiction of the court, then he may raise the said objection before the same and competent court, which can decide the same on its merits," the judge said.On September 6, 2017, a day after Gauri Lankesh was murdered, Rahul Gandhi had tweeted,"Anybody who speaks against the RSS/BJP is attacked &even killed. They want to impose only one ideology which is against the nature of India."The suit filed in 2019 by Champanerkar, claimed that both Gandhi and Yechury have always blamed RSS for any act of violence and urged that such blaming should stop. In this regard, the suit highlighted their comments wherein both said that anyone opposing RSS ideology will be silenced.Champanerkar sought a token compensation of ₹1..The order passed by judge Mantri said that Section 24 of the CPC does not prescribe for determining the question of pecuniary jurisdiction of the Court."Therefore, it would not be proper to exercise the powers under the said section to determine the question of pecuniary jurisdiction of the court on the application of the defendant in the suit. Hence, I do not find any substance in the contention of the applicant to transfer the matter from senior judge to junior judge on the ground of pecuniary jurisdiction," the judge added..The matter would now proceed before Civil Judge, Senior Division..Advocate Narayan Iyer appeared for Gandhi while advocate Aditya Mishra represented the plaintiff in the suit..[Read Order]