Madras High Court Requests Advocate General To Consider Invoking Vexatious Litigation (Prevention) Act Against Chennai Resident

The Madras High Court recently requested the Advocate General R Shunmugasundaram to consider passing appropriate orders under the Vexatious Litigation (Prevention) Act 1949 against a Chennai resident who is prima facie in the habit of filing vexatious litigations in different courts throughout the state.

The bench of Justice Paresh Upadhyay and Justice D Bharatha Chakravarthy gave liberty to the Advocate General to consider the materials on record and pass appropriate orders as he deems fit.

We note that, on the basis of the material produced before this Court, prima facie we find that appropriate order needs to be passed against the present appellant, invoking provisions of the Vexatious Litigation (Prevention) Act, 1949, however we clarify that, these observations are prima facie in nature and in the event learned Advocate-General arrives at the satisfaction that such an order need not be passed, our observations will not bind him, leaving it open to the respondents of these appeals to take recourse to the remedy available to them under the law.

The Act provides that if on an application made by the Advocate General, the High Court is satisfied that any person has habitually and without any reasonable ground instituted vexatious proceedings civil or criminal, in any Court, the High Court may, after giving that person an opportunity of being heard, order that no proceedings, civil or criminal, shall be instituted by him in any Court, without prior permission.

The court was hearing an appeal against a common order directing all the connected cases to be tried together. After hearing the parties, when the court was not inclined to interfere with the order, the counsel for the appellant sought adjournment for getting instructions from the client. However, the counsel for the appellant did not appear in the later postings even after repeated opportunities were given by the court.

The contesting respondents informed the court that the appellant was in the habit of filing vexatious litigations, both civil and criminal before different courts. It was also submitted that the appellant was taking advantage of this pendency of appeal before the trial court. The High Court had thus clarified that the appellant shall not be allowed to take advantage of the pendency of the appeal.

Taking the materials on record, the court opined that the appellant should not be let off merely by ordering dismissal of the appeal. The court opined that it was necessary to check the nuisance created by the appellant. Thus, the court requested the Advocate General to consider the matter as required under the Act.

The nuisance created and continued by him needs to be checked. For this reason, it may be required to request learned Advocate General to look into the matter, as required under the provisions of The Vexatious Litigation (Prevention) Act, 1949. Since this course is being explored, one more opportunity needs to be granted to the appellant to appear before this Court either in person or through his advocate, if he desires.

Even though a final opportunity was granted, the counsel for the plaintiff pleaded ignorance of the proceedings and submitted that the court may pass appropriate orders on the basis of materials available on record. 

Thus, the court requested the Advocate General to pass appropriate orders under the Act.

Case Title: Azizul Karim v. PS Kirubakaran and others

Case No: OSA Nos. 254 & 255 of 2022

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (mad) 427