Madhya Pradesh High Court Proposes To Impose ₹10 Lakh Cost On Litigant For Filing Repetitive Petition
story Full View
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has proposed to impose a cost of Rs 10 Lakhs on a litigant for filing a petition seeking the same relief, which had already been resolved earlier.“This is a clear case of abuse of the process of Court. The parties are the same, the lands are the same and the prayers are also the same. In spite of which, it appears that the petitioner has filed this...
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 Madhya Pradesh High Court has proposed to impose a cost of Rs 10 Lakhs on a litigant for filing a petition seeking the same relief, which had already been resolved earlier.
“This is a clear case of abuse of the process of Court. The parties are the same, the lands are the same and the prayers are also the same. In spite of which, it appears that the petitioner has filed this petition misusing the provisions of law and attempting to blackmail the respondents,” a division bench of Chief Justice Ravi Malimath and Justice Vishal Mishra observed.
“We do not think that such petition could be entertained. Therefore, we propose to dismiss the petition by imposing a cost of Rs.10.00 Lakhs,” the bench added.
The petitioner, Arjundas Nebhnani had earlier filed a writ petition in 2017 whereby he sought similar reliefs by challenging an order passed by the Director, Directorate of Geology & Mining in 2016 granting quarry lease to the respondent party.
However, the State Counsel therein had suggested that the impugned order is appealable in terms of Rule 57 of the Madhya Pradesh Minor Mineral Rules, 1996, and further in terms of Rule 59 there was a power to condone delay on showing sufficient cause.
Accordingly, the petition was disposed of on 19.05.2017, due to the availability of an alternative statutory remedy, with liberty to the petitioner to avail alternate statutory remedy.
Thereafter, the petitioner availed the remedy and proceedings were initiated culminating in the order dated 19.02.2019. The appeal and revision were also rejected by the authorities. Thereafter, the petitioner again filed instant petition seeking the very same relief.
The matter is listed next week to provide an opportunity to the Petitioner.
Case Title: Arjundas Nebhnani Vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh And Others Wp No. 11799 Of 2021
Appearance:
Shri Rohit Raghuvanshi - Advocate For Petitioner.
Shri Amit Seth - Deputy Advocate General For Respondent Nos. 1 To 4.
Shri Naman Nagrath - Senior Advocate With Shri Jubin Prasad - Advocate For Respondent No.5.