Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2003
  6. /
  7. January

Rajesh Khanna vs Collector And Ors.

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|19 February, 2003

JUDGMENT / ORDER

ORDER A.K. Yog and Ghanshyam Dass, JJ.
1. Sri Ved Vyas Mtshra, advocate, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No. 3 points out that this petitioner had earlier filed Writ Petition No. 2308 of 2002 Rajesh Khanna v. District Magistrate and Ors., in respect of the loan in question, which was got dismissed as not pressed (without seeking liberty of the Court to present fresh petition). Another Writ Petition No. 27341 of 2002 was filed in respect of the same loan. The said writ petition was dismissed on the ground that earlier writ petition was got dismissed as not pressed without liberty from the Court to file fresh petition.
2. According to the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the contesting respondent, the aforesaid facts have not been disclosed by the petitioner in the present writ petition. It is, in our opinion, gross abuse of the process of court. The conduct of the petitioner cannot be ignored. No compassion or sympathy can be shown to a litigant, like the petitioner, who has concealed relevant and material facts. The petitioner is guilty of not approaching the Court with clean hands.
3. In view of the above, we impose a cost of Rs. 10,000 which shall also be recovered as land revenue, if not deposited by the petitioner within three weeks from today. The respondent No. 1 shall take steps to realise the cost within four weeks of receipt of a certified copy of this Judgment, a copy of which shall be sent by the Registry within three weeks from today. The cost being recovered, shall be remitted to the State Legal Services Authority. We specifically overrule the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the costs are on higher side. Since, in our opinion, if such a practice is over-looked or encouraged, without taking a deterrent action, functioning in the Court itself will get paralysed, it is, therefore, eminent for the Court to impose heavy costs upon such litigant who deliberately abuse process of the Court in order to ensure its course own in existence.
4. The petition is dismissed with costs subject to the above observations and directions.
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Rajesh Khanna vs Collector And Ors.

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
19 February, 2003
Judges
  • A Yog
  • G Dass