Add Tribune As Your Trusted Source
TrendingVideosIndia
Opinions | CommentEditorialsThe MiddleLetters to the EditorReflections
UPSC | Exam ScheduleExam Mentor
State | Himachal PradeshPunjabJammu & KashmirHaryanaChhattisgarhMadhya PradeshRajasthanUttarakhandUttar Pradesh
City | ChandigarhAmritsarJalandharLudhianaDelhiPatialaBathindaShaharnama
World | ChinaUnited StatesPakistan
Diaspora
Features | The Tribune ScienceTime CapsuleSpectrumIn-DepthTravelFood
Business | My MoneyAutoZone
News Columns | Straight DriveCanada CallingLondon LetterKashmir AngleJammu JournalInside the CapitalHimachal CallingHill View
Don't Miss
Advertisement

HC fines litigants Rs 50K for ‘imaginary’ transfer plea

Terms allegations against trial judge ‘fictitious, fallacious’
Delhi High Court. File

Unlock Exclusive Insights with The Tribune Premium

Take your experience further with Premium access. Thought-provoking Opinions, Expert Analysis, In-depth Insights and other Member Only Benefits
Yearly Premium ₹999 ₹349/Year
Yearly Premium $49 $24.99/Year
Advertisement

Casting aspersions on a judge without evidence has cost two litigants dearly. The Delhi High Court has dismissed their plea to transfer a rent recovery case from a Tis Hazari court and imposed a cost of Rs 50,000, terming the allegations against the trial judge “fictitious and fallacious”.

Advertisement

The petitioners had alleged that the Additional District Judge hearing the matter addressed the respondent in a “friendly manner” and sought transfer of the case. Justice Saurabh Banerjee, however, said their petition carried “flimsy, misleading and mythical assertions” with no material to support it.

Advertisement

“The petitioners by way of the present petition are trying to cast unwarranted, fictious and fallacious aspersions by making flimsy, misleading and mythical assertions on a sitting Judge of the learned trial court, which are not only contrary to the records before this court but also without any backing thereto. This court, in any event, takes a serious objection to the filing of the present petition, and that too by making and cooking up an imaginary story,” the High Court said.

The court said the plea was nothing more than “a figment of infertile imagination” based on “mere whims and fancies” and held that the litigants had suppressed facts. It noted that they had not filed any affidavit from their counsel, had continued to appear before the same judge even after the alleged incident and had earlier moved a similar transfer plea before the Principal District and Sessions Judge, which they later withdrew.

“Considering the averments made by the petitioners as also their conduct before this court, this court is of the opinion that the present petition is based on mere whims and fancies. The present petition is nothing but a figment of infertile imagination of the petitioners with bald assertions without any basis,” Justice Banerjee observed.

Advertisement

Finding no merit, the court dismissed the petition with the following direction: “In view thereof, and finding no merit therein, the present petition, along with applications, if any, is dismissed subject to cost of Rs 50,000 to be paid by the petitioners to the Delhi High Court Bar Association Lawyers Social Security and Welfare Fund within a period of two weeks.”

Advertisement
Tags :
#FalseAllegationsCourtCostsDelhiHighCourtFrivolousPetitionJudicialMisconductLegalDisputeLegalEthicsRentRecoveryCaseTransferPetitionDeniedTrialJudge
Show comments
Advertisement