Pre-Hearing Costs Must Be Imposed In Commercial Matters To Avoid Frivolous Petitions, Says CJI DY Chandrachud

Update: 2022-12-05 10:43 GMT
story

Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, while holding court on Monday, orally remarked that it was time to impose pre-hearing costs in commercial cases to prevent frivolous matters involving commercial issues to be argued before the Supreme Court of India.While remarking that such frivolous commercial matters wasted a lot of the Court's time and needed to be clamped down upon, CJI Chandrachud...

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.

Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, while holding court on Monday, orally remarked that it was time to impose pre-hearing costs in commercial cases to prevent frivolous matters involving commercial issues to be argued before the Supreme Court of India.

While remarking that such frivolous commercial matters wasted a lot of the Court's time and needed to be clamped down upon, CJI Chandrachud said–

"The time has come to impose anticipatory costs in commercial matters which come to Supreme Court...It is time for the Supreme Court in commercial matters to say that first deposit 5 crores cost and if it's frivolous then the cost will remain with us."

He further highlighted that such matters before the Supreme Court were appeals against ad-interim orders of lower courts. He remarked that this unnecessarily took the time of Supreme Court. CJI Chandrachud said–

"You do not realise that you come to Supreme Court for such matters and take up our time. You are challenging a division bench order which upheld an ADJ order of not granting you ad interim relief. Why should we interfere?"

While referring to his time as a lawyer in the Bombay High Court, he said–

"When I was in Bombay High Court, I have argued umpteen number of such applications and judge used to always ask - when did the cause of action arise? If you tell the judge that it arise two years ago, then your case is gone. No relief would be granted.

In another matter before the bench led by CJI Chandrachud, where a PIL was filed stating that there was a perception among the public that Life Insurance Company and an SBI entity enjoyed sovereign right, CJI Chandrachud expressed his disapproval and said–

"What is this ? This is complete misuse of PIL jurisdiction. You can proceed but we are putting you on notice that there may be costs on this."

Tags:    

Similar News