Neighbour's statements against Salman appear to be supported by evidence: Court

The statements made against Bollywood superstar Salman Khan by a neighbour appear to be supported by documentary evidence a civil court has said hereThe court last week refused interim relief to Khan who has filed a defamation case against his Panvel farmhouse neighbor Ketan KakkadAdditional Sessions Judge Anil Laddhad rejected Khans plea seeking an interim order barring Kakkad from making any further comments against him or his family members in connection with Khans farmhouse at Panvel in neighbouring Raigad districtThe detailed order became available on WednesdayKakkad an NRI owns a plot on a hill next to Khans farmhouseKhans defamation suit alleged that Kakkad made defamatory comments against the actor in an interview to a YouTube channelKhans advocate Pradeep Gandhy argued that Kakkad made false disparaging and defamatory allegations in videos posts and tweetsKakkad had tried to purchase a plot of land next to Khans farmhouse but the transaction was cancelled by the authorities on the ground that it was illegal the lawyer told the courtKakkad then started making false accusations that the transaction was cancelled at the behest of Khan and his family Gandhy statedAdvocates Abha Singh and Aditya Pratap appearing for Kakkad opposed the relief sought by Khan arguing that the statements revolved around facts aboutKhans property and could not amount to defamationKakkad had purchased his land in 1996 He retired in 2014 and wanted to live there but could not access his land due to encumbrances caused by Salman Khan and his family the lawyers claimedThe judge after examining the tweets and videos placed on record said that Khan did not explain how the innuendos in the tweets pertained to himThere is documentary proof to substantiate the allegation about Khan restraining Kakkad from approaching his land the court notedAs to the allegations that Salman committed encroachment and violated the Forest Act and Matheran EcoshySensitive Notification Kakkad placed on record the applications made to the forest department and the collector along with show shycause notices issued by the forest department the judge saidThe defendant Kakkad contended that he is a whistleshyblower to the illegal acts done by the plaintiff Khan and he made imputations in public interest by taking reasonable precautions by producing documentary material in support of the same the judge notedTherefore at preliminary stageas the plaintiff failed to explain innuendo how it relates to him and the defendant raised the plea of justification which is prima facie supported by documentary evidence I am not inclined to grant an injunction to the plaintiff the court ruledThis story has been sourced from a third party syndicated feed agencies Midday accepts no responsibility or liability for its dependability trustworthiness reliability and data of the text Midday managementmiddaycom reserves the sole right to alter delete or remove without notice the content in its absolute discretion for any reason whatsoever