Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy declined Zoho’s request to have the posts removed or “screened” at this stage, observing that it was not yet clear whether the alleged discrepancies were attributable to Zoho’s software or to the payment gateway used by FlexyPe.
[24/04, 13:35] sekarreporter1: http://youtube.com/post/Ugkx2KTwk8JE1BINrL5E-bpPeZuJ2n-lIaFu?si=6HOf6s5RLYlBqJS7
[24/04, 13:35] sekarreporter1: [24/04, 13:34] sekarreporter1: The Madras High Court on Wednesday refused to grant immediate interim relief to Zoho Corporation in its dispute with FlexyPE Technologies over allegedly disparaging LinkedIn posts concerning Zoho Books.
Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy declined Zoho’s request to have the posts removed or “screened” at this stage, observing that it was not yet clear whether the alleged discrepancies were attributable to Zoho’s software or to the payment gateway used by FlexyPe.
Appearing for FlexyPe, Advocate H Siddharth submitted that no further posts had been made on the issue and that the defendants did not intend to publish any additional posts until the next date of hearing. Recording this submission, the Court proceeded with the matter and also permitted the defendants to challenge the maintainability of the suit.
Counsel further raised objections to the maintainability of the suit, contending that a defamation action cannot be instituted as a commercial suit as it does not fall within the ambit of a “commercial dispute.” The Court granted liberty to the defendants to raise all such objections.
The defendants also stated that they would tender an apology if it is established that the fault lay with the payment gateway provider and not Zoho.
The dispute arises from LinkedIn posts in which Azeem Hussain alleged serious discrepancies in Zoho Books, including failed transactions that were recorded as successful payments, leading to financial mismatches for his company.
Zoho has filed a ₹10 crore defamation suit against FlexyPe and Hussain, seeking damages and injunctive relief.
Senior Advocate MS Krishnan, appearing for Zoho, argued that the posts used “very, very foul language” and wrongly attributed the issue to Zoho, when in fact the problem stemmed from incorrect payment status updates from a third-party payment gateway.
He submitted that Zoho’s system merely reflects data received from the gateway and does not independently process payments, and urged the Court to at least direct that the posts be screened, pointing to the reputational harm caused.
The Court, however, was not inclined to grant such relief at this stage, observing that if there is indeed a defect in a product, users are entitled to express their views, and that businesses operating in the market must contend with both positive and negative feedback.
It added that if Zoho is able to establish, even prima facie, that the fault is not attributable to it, appropriate directions could be considered at a later stage.
The matter is next listed on June 17.
[24/04, 13:34] sekarreporter1: Zoho Corporation Pvt Ltd v. FlexyPe Technologies Pvt Ltd & Anr
[24/04, 13:36] sekarreporter1: For Zoho Corp – Senior Advocate MS Krishnan
[24/04, 13:36] sekarreporter1: For Flexype and its Director Azeem Hussain – H Siddarth Bhandari
