Who won Nair or Dyer

There appears to be confusion in this question, as no prominent historical legal case pitted someone named "Nair" directly against General Dyer. The Hunter Committee investigation (1919-1920) examined General Dyer's actions at Jallianwala Bagh, with various Indian and British lawyers presenting arguments. The committee's findings were mixed—General Dyer was removed from military service and his actions were criticized, but he never faced criminal prosecution. In terms of "winning," the outcome was unsatisfactory for Indian victims and activists who sought proper justice.

If the question refers to a fictional representation in films or dramatizations about Jallianwala Bagh, additional context would be needed. Historically, no meaningful legal victory was achieved against Dyer through British courts. He died in 1927 without facing criminal consequences. The real "victory" came from the broader impact—the massacre galvanized Indian public opinion against British rule, strengthened the independence movement, and morally delegitimized colonial governance. Udham Singh's assassination of Michael O'Dwyer in 1940 was viewed by many as a form of justice outside the legal system, though it resulted in Singh's execution.