A Delhi Court has imposed a penalty of Rs 10,000 on a litigant and dismissed his petition for seeking transfer of the proceedings from a court to another.
The petitioner has sought transfer of the subject judicial proceedings on the allegation of bias against the Judicial Officer concerned.
"It is held that the transfer petition is not just completely devoid of merit, but the same is also frivolous and an attempt at protracting the proceedings before the concerned court by levelling baseless allegations. Therefore, the petition is dismissed with a cost of Rs 10,000 to be paid by the petitioner to the respondent before the concerned court of Additional Rent Controller within one week towards litigation cost of the respondent pertaining to these proceedings," District and Sessions Judge Girish Kathpalia said on November 15.
The court also said if the subject proceedings are transferred out of the court of the Judicial Officer concerned, such an approach would further encourage the litigants to indulge in forum shopping by levelling allegations against a Judicial Officer in order to protract and get the proceedings transferred.
The court also said that it would severely demoralize the District Judiciary to see that any litigant can allege anything, casting aspersions on the Judicial Officers as happened in the present case, where the impression conveyed through the petition and submissions was that it is "out of decency" that the utterances of the Judicial Officer concerned were not quoted in the transfer petition.
Judge Kathpalia also said, "It is indeed a sad state of affairs that in the recent past a trend is growing where the Judicial Officers are dragged into the dock and they have to defend themselves constantly in order to protect themselves from frivolous complaints. The Judicial Officers in such situations have no choice, but to defend themselves to the hilt. "
"Not just some of the litigants, but even some lawyers do not think twice before filing reckless complaints and transfer petitions in order to avoid contesting the list on merits. In such cases, should the system even snatch away the right of the Judicial Officer to defend his dignity? No," the court said.
The court was hearing a petition filed by a man, who is facing eviction proceedings under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, sought transfer of the proceedings out of the court of CCJ-cum-ARC (Central), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi to some other court of competent jurisdiction.
After 25 'Missing' Tigers Report In Rajasthan, 10 Spotted On Camera Traps "Can't Be Left Unpunished": Delhi High Court Jails Lawyer For Remarks Against Judges Condemn Death Threats By Ceasefire-Linked Kuki Insurgents, Says Thadou Tribe Body Aligarh Muslim University A Minority Institution? Supreme Court's Key 4:3 Verdict Elon Musk Replies To 'We Need Your Help Removing Trudeau' Post Australian Outlet That Interviewed S Jaishankar Responds To Canada's Ban In 17th-Century "Anti-Vampire" Grave, Woman Buried With Sickle Around Neck China's Maths "Prodigy" Cheated To Ace The Global Contest, Probe Finds Australian Outlet That Interviewed S Jaishankar Responds To Canada's Ban Track Latest News Live on NDTV.com and get news updates from India and around the world.