Won’t make statements against Bhatts, Luveina Lodh tells HC

Bombay High Court. File   | Photo Credit: Vivek Bendre

In what may bring an interim relief to film-makers Mahesh and Mukesh Bhatt, actor Luveina Lodh’s lawyer told the Bombay High Court on Monday that she has not and will not make any defamatory statements.

A single bench of justice AK Menon was hearing a suit filed by the Bhatts seeking urgent injunctive reliefs against Ms. Lodh and refraining her from making, publishing, circulating any defamatory/slanderous comments against them and also seeking damages of ₹1 crore each for the act of defamation on the part of the actor by publishing an offending video making various grossly defamatory, slanderous, distasteful and patently false allegations and statements against the director on her Instagram account.

The advocate appearing for Ms. Lodh told the court that his client will not make any statements against the brothers. The court then restrained Ms. Lodh from making and circulating any defamatory statements against the Bhatts and granted her three weeks to file her reply.

In the video, Ms. Lodh has alleged that her husband Sumit Sabharwal is Mr. Mahesh Bhatt’s nephew and supplies drugs and women and Mr. Bhatt operates the system.

According to the plaint, “On October 23, Ms. Lodh posted an offending video making some allegations against the duo. The next day the video was picked up by various news agencies and was published in various media reports which has further resulted in dissemination of defamatory material against the Bhatts.”

It mentions, “On October 24, a notice was sent to Ms. Lodh stating: delete the video from Instagram and/or any public platform within 24 hours, furnish an unconditional apology and post it on Instagram by saying the contents of the video are untrue and stand withdrawn and furnish a proof that you have complied with the above requisitions.”

The plaint adds, “Despite the receipt of the said notice, Ms. Lodh has till date neither removed the video from her Instagram account nor has she complied with any other requisition in the notice. Hence the suit.”

This article is closed for comments.
Please Email the Editor

Printable version | Nov 28, 2020 7:51:03 PM |

Next Story