Delhi HC Directs Donation Of Rs. 10,000 To Slain CRPF Jawans’ Kin As Costs For Abuse Of Process Of Law [Read Judgment]
story
The Delhi High Court on Monday came down heavily on a litigant for wasting its time, and directed them to deposit Rs. 10,000 with bharatkeveer.gov.in, a website launched to facilitate donations to slain CRPF Jawans’ kin.“Since the review petition and the connected applications are clearly an abuse of process of law, the same are therefore dismissed with costs of Rs.10,000/- to be deposited...
Your free access to Live Law has expired
Please Subscribe for unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments, Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.
The Delhi High Court on Monday came down heavily on a litigant for wasting its time, and directed them to deposit Rs. 10,000 with bharatkeveer.gov.in, a website launched to facilitate donations to slain CRPF Jawans’ kin.
“Since the review petition and the connected applications are clearly an abuse of process of law, the same are therefore dismissed with costs of Rs.10,000/- to be deposited in four weeks with the website bharatkeveer.gov.in,” Justice Valmiki J. Mehta ordered.
Justice Mehta noted that the Petitioners were indulging in dilatory tactics to continue enjoyment of the benefit of an interim order issued in their favor. It further noted that the Appellants had, in fact, been the Defendants in an earlier suit concerning the same property, and had lost their rights till the Supreme Court.
It, therefore, dismissed the Review Petition, observing that the Petition was “hopelessly misconceived”, and ordered payment of costs for abuse of process of law.
Read the Judgment Here
Full View
“Since the review petition and the connected applications are clearly an abuse of process of law, the same are therefore dismissed with costs of Rs.10,000/- to be deposited in four weeks with the website bharatkeveer.gov.in,” Justice Valmiki J. Mehta ordered.
Justice Mehta noted that the Petitioners were indulging in dilatory tactics to continue enjoyment of the benefit of an interim order issued in their favor. It further noted that the Appellants had, in fact, been the Defendants in an earlier suit concerning the same property, and had lost their rights till the Supreme Court.
It, therefore, dismissed the Review Petition, observing that the Petition was “hopelessly misconceived”, and ordered payment of costs for abuse of process of law.
Read the Judgment Here