Delhi HC imposes ₹25k costs on litigant for seeking transfer of case based on trial judge's oral comments

The Delhi High Court recently imposed costs of ₹25,000 on a litigant for seeking transfer of a pending case from the trial court to another court on apprehension of bias.

In the verdict delivered on August 10, Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar strongly deprecated the petitioner Mohammad Ahmad for seeking the transfer.

The petitioner sought transfer of a suit from Karkardooma district court, citing an apprehension that the matter would not be decided fairly by the presiding judicial officer. The basis of such apprehension was certain oral observations made by the trial court.

He had further alleged that the trial court judge had shown “undue indulgence” to the opposite party regarding filing of an application for detention of the petitioner. 

“Allegations of such nature against a Judicial Officer cannot be lightly made merely on the basis of oral observations or statements made during the course of a hearing,” the Court stated.

The Court stated that these were serious allegations against the judicial officer and ought not be made without material substance. 

“The allegations made against the learned Trial Court are neither warranted nor conducive to the administration of justice.”

Justice Shankar stated that observations made in the course of hearing does not tantamount to determination of the issues.

Further, the Court stated that the provision of transfer under the Civil Procedure Code cannot be invoked on such apprehension against the judge. This petition amounts to an abuse of the process of the Court, it observed. 

"Such allegations ought not to be made in a routine manner or founded merely upon an interpretation placed by a litigant upon the oral exchanges taking place during the course of proceedings," the Court said while dismissing the transfer plea with costs.

Advocates Santosh and Noor-Ul-Islam appeared for the petitioner.

Advocates Sarojanand Jha, Rajreeta Ghosh, Rahul Kumar and Muskan Saxena appeared for respondent.

[Read judgment]