The Gujarat High Court has held that the court cannot impose unreasonable costs if it feels filing frivolous litigation consumes court’s time.
The bench of Justice Maulik J.Shelat has observed that whenever the court feels that a litigant has consumed the time of the court by filing frivolous litigation, then surely the court has the power to impose a cost. Nonetheless, such a cost should be reasonable and not unbearable to the litigant. All other factors, including the conduct of the parties while pursuing legal remedies, are required to be taken note of by the concerned court before imposing the cost.
“It is deplorable to note that, in the absence of payment of cost, the petitioner is deprived of even filing a regular first appeal before the concerned District Court, despite there being no such observation made in the impugned order to that effect,” the court said.
The petitioner submitted that the prayer made in the present petition is for quashing and setting aside the order of the trial court, but it is confined only to the part of the cost which has been imposed by the trial court.
After the dismissal of the suit, as per the legal advice received by the petitioner, a review application was filed before the trial court being Civil Misc. Application No.91 of 2021, which came to be rejected vide impugned order, whereby the trial court imposed a cost of ₹25,000 to be paid to the District Legal Services Authority, 25,000 to be paid to the District Legal Services Authority, Anand.
The petitioner contended that that the cost imposed is exorbitant and not germane to the application. It has not been observed in the order that any fraud has been committed by the petitioner. Due to the non-payment of cost, even the petitioner is not able to file an appeal before the District Court as the registry of the District Court is insisting on first depositing the cost, by seriously affecting the rights of the petitioner. He would lastly submit that the cost imposed upon the petitioner may be reduced, and if this court thinks it fit, the reasonable cost may be imposed.
The court noted that the trial court, while imposing a cost of Rs. 25,000 to be paid to the District Legal Services Authority, has not reached to the conclusion that the review application filed by the petitioner is vexatious or false. It is true that no case might have been made out for review, and thereby, the time of the civil court must have been consumed to decide such an application, but at the same time, the right available to the party cannot be taken away by the court, as all concerned, including the court, are governed by the law.
Case Details
Case Title: Ramsingbhai Dhanjibhai Prajapati Versus Dahyabhai Dhanjibhai Prajapati & Ors.
Case No.: R/Special Civil Application No. 15942 Of 2024
Date: 31/01/2025
Counsel For Petitioner: Adv. Nisarg J Desai
Counsel For Respondent: Adv. Roma I Fidelis
Read More: THE JAN VISHWAS ACT, 2023: A STEP TOWARDS DECRIMINALIZATION AND REGULATORY REFORM
