Delhi High Court Rejects Lawyer's Plea With ₹1 Lakh Costs, Says Extreme View To Be Taken When Process Is Abused By Members Of Legal Fraternity

The Delhi High Court has imposed Rs. 1 lakh costs on a lawyer for filing an application under Section 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and trying to resuscitate the issue of forged and fabricated title documents filed in a civil suit in 2009.

“The applicant is a practising advocate. This Court cannot believe that the applicant is unaware of the law. It is obviously in full knowledge and consciousness of what he is doing, and the manner in which he is abusing the legal process with impunity, that the applicant has filed the present application,” Justice C Hari Shankar said.

The court observed that when the legal process is abused by members of the legal fraternity, who are supposed to be its protectors and preservers, it has to take an extremely stern view of the matter.

“This Court has had to spend almost over 40 minutes in hearing the arguments of the applicant and has had to spend another half an hour in dictating the present order,” the court said.

It added: “It is not for this Court to divine the motives of the applicant in acting that he has. The Court, however, has to ensure that such misadventures and transparent attempts at abusing the legal process are nipped in the bud, so that other such trigger-happy litigants are deterred from committing similar misdemeanours.”

A suit was filed by two individuals against the father of the lawyer and his sons and daughters who were allowed to stay in the suit property as licensees.

On termination of the license and having failed to vacate the property, the suit was filed seeking permanent injunction against the family. After the father's death, the lawyer was contesting the suit.

The suit was decreed in favour of the plaintiffs and the challenge filed by the lawyer's family was dismissed in appeal. The second appeal and review petition were also rejected. Later, the Supreme Court in 2015 disposed of the SLP by extending the period to vacate the premises till January 05, 2016.

A second suit was instituted by the lawyer's family to declare the judgment in the earlier suit as null and void, having been obtained by fraud.

The suit was dismissed observing that the allegations even on their face “did not disclose any existence of any kind of fraud being played upon the Court”. The appeals and review were also dismissed.

An application was then filed by the lawyer seeking the institution of criminal proceedings against the opposite party for having obtained the judgment and decree in the initial suit by fraud.

While dismissing the application with costs, Justice Shankar observed that the matter was carried to the Supreme Court which, too, did not choose to interfere with the judicial orders and merely gave time to the lawyer's family to vacate the suit property.

“The issue of the documents dated 18 March 2009 being forged and fabricated has now been sought to be resuscitated a third time by means of the present application under Section 340 of the CrPC,” the court said.

Title: LATE AKSHEM CHAND THROUGH LR ATLO DEVI v. SURESH BALA & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 321

Click Here To Read Order