Delhi High Court Denounces Baseless Transfer Petition, Imposes Rs. 50,000 Fine

Petitioners Accused of Casting Unwarranted Aspersions on Trial Judge in Rent Recovery Suit

In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court dismissed a transfer petition filed by Neeti Sharma and another petitioner seeking the relocation of a suit from the court of the Additional District Judge (ADJ) at Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi. The petitioners had alleged bias and friendly behavior between the presiding judge and the opposite party, Kailash Chand Gupta and others, involved in a suit for recovery of rent, mesne profits, and damages. However, Justice Saurabh Banerjee, presiding over the case, found the petition to be lacking merit and based on unfounded assertions.

On examining the petition, Justice Banerjee noted that the allegations were merely bald assertions without any substantive evidence to support claims of judicial bias. The Court highlighted the frivolous nature of the petition, describing it as a product of the petitioners' imagination. The petitioners had not provided any detailed averments or filed supporting documents before the High Court, despite having previously filed a written statement and affidavits in the trial court proceedings.

The Court was informed that a similar petition had been filed and subsequently withdrawn by the petitioners before the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi. This withdrawal further underscored the lack of substance in their claims, according to Justice Banerjee.

Emphasizing the importance of judicial integrity, the Court admonished the petitioners for attempting to malign a sitting judge with fictitious and misleading assertions. Such actions, the Court stated, are detrimental to the judicial process and cannot be tolerated.

As a consequence of filing a baseless petition, the Delhi High Court imposed a cost of Rs. 50,000 on the petitioners, payable to the Delhi High Court Bar Association Lawyers Social Security and Welfare Fund within two weeks.

This judgment serves as a stern reminder of the judiciary's intolerance for misuse of judicial processes and the importance of substantiating claims with credible evidence.

Bottom Line:

Transfer petition dismissed with cost for lack of merit and for making baseless allegations against a sitting Judge of the Trial Court.

Statutory provision(s): Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Section 24

Neeti Sharma v. Kailash Chand Gupta, (Delhi) : Law Finder Doc id # 2786327