Supreme Court Refuses to Entertain Cobrapost’s Plea Against Anil Ambani Defamation Suit Withdrawal; Directs Portal to Pursue Remedy Before Delhi High Court

May 29, 2026 : The Supreme Court on Friday declined to entertain a special leave petition filed by Cobrapost challenging a Delhi trial court order that allowed industrialist Anil Ambani to withdraw a defamation suit with liberty to institute a fresh case on the same cause of action. The Court held that the news portal has adequate remedies available under civil law and should pursue its pending challenge before the Delhi High Court.

A Bench comprising Surya Kant, Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul Pancholi observed that if a fresh suit is eventually filed, Cobrapost would be free to raise all available legal objections before the competent civil court, including issues relating to maintainability, jurisdiction and abuse of process.

The dispute stems from reports published by Cobrapost alleging that companies linked to Ambani were involved in a fraud exceeding ₹41,000 crore. In response, Ambani had instituted a civil defamation suit before a Delhi trial court against the portal and certain media entities. However, the suit was later withdrawn after the court granted him liberty to file a fresh suit on the same cause of action.

Appearing for Cobrapost, counsel argued that the trial court had improperly granted permission under Order XXIII of the Code of Civil Procedure without issuing notice to the defendants or giving them an opportunity to be heard. It was contended that withdrawal of a suit with liberty to file afresh can only be permitted in limited circumstances under Order XXIII Rule 1 CPC and that defendants possess a substantive right to oppose such a request.

Cobrapost further submitted that allowing a fresh suit could prejudice its pending challenge before the Delhi High Court and potentially render those proceedings ineffective. The Supreme Court, however, noted that such concerns could be addressed before the appropriate forum if fresh proceedings are initiated.

The Bench also took note of the fact that Cobrapost’s application seeking recall of the trial court’s withdrawal order is already pending before the Delhi High Court. The Court observed that if the High Court ultimately sets aside the withdrawal order, the original defamation suit could stand restored.

During the hearing, Cobrapost also questioned the maintainability of the original proceedings in Delhi, arguing that Ambani’s principal economic and social connections are located in Mumbai and that the doctrine of forum convenience would favour courts in Maharashtra. The portal additionally contended that the plaint failed to quantify damages, raising questions regarding valuation and the maintainability of the defamation claim itself.

The Supreme Court declined to examine those objections at this stage, holding that such issues should first be considered by the appropriate civil court if and when fresh proceedings are instituted. The Bench also refused to direct the Delhi High Court to expedite the pending matter, while granting liberty to Cobrapost to move an application before the High Court seeking an early hearing.

The Delhi High Court had earlier issued notice on Cobrapost’s challenge to the trial court’s December 10, 2025 order permitting withdrawal of the defamation suit with liberty to file afresh. Notices were issued to Ambani, Live Media & Publishers Private Limited and Bennett Coleman and Company Limited.

The controversy originated from proceedings before the Delhi trial court on November 17, 2025, when the court declined to grant an ex parte ad interim injunction sought by Ambani against the media organisations. The court had held that the defendants were entitled to be heard before any prior restraint or gag order could be issued. Following that development, the defamation suit was withdrawn.

Cobrapost has maintained that the withdrawal order is contrary to the statutory framework of the Code of Civil Procedure and violates the principles of natural justice.

The case is titled COBRAPOST.COM v. ANIL D. AMBANI AND ORS..