Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Tushar Rao Gedela, J.
Shri Shiv Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Shri Satish & Ors. – Respondents
CM(M) 894 of 2023
Decided On : 29-05-2023
Costs - Imposition of Costs - Setting Aside - Family Care - Legal Provision
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought to set aside the costs of Rs.15,000 imposed upon them by the Trial Court, citing the inability to be present due to taking care of a family member.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found the imposition of costs to be onerous and set them aside without objections on merits. The Court directed the Trial Court to take up the application seeking restoration of the plaint at the earliest.
Issues: Imposition of costs, petitioner's inability to be present, past conduct, setting aside of costs, restoration of the plaint
Ratio Decidendi: The Court considered the petitioner's circumstances and found the imposition of costs to be onerous, leading to the decision to set them aside.
Final Decision: The Court set aside the imposition of costs and directed the Trial Court to expedite the restoration of the plaint.
JUDGMENT
Tushar Rao Gedela, J. (Oral)
[The proceeding has been conducted through Hybrid mode]
CM APPL. 28464/2023 (for exemption)
1. Exemption is allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. The application stands disposed of.
CM(M) 894/2023
3. Ms. Pooravashi Kalra, learned counsel appears for the petitioner and submits that the only relief that the petitioner seeks in the present petition, is restricted to setting aside of the costs of Rs.15,000/-, which was imposed upon the plaintiff.
4. The petitioner was stated to have been taking care of a family member and on that account the petitioner could not be present before the learned Trial Court.
5. Mr. Singh, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 submits that the order is complete in all respects and a detailed one and keeping in view the past conduct of the petitioner, is sustainable in law.
6. This Court has considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and it appears that the imposition of costs of Rs.15,000/- in the present case is onerous.
7. Accordingly, the imposition of costs are set aside, without any objections on merits.
8. In view of the above terms, the present petition is disposed of.
9. It goes without saying that the application seeking restoration of the plaint be taken up by the learned Trial Court in all earnest on the next date of hearing and dispose it of at the earliest.
The court has the discretion to set aside the imposition of costs if it deems them to be onerous, considering the circumstances of the petitioner.
The court emphasizes the importance of imposing costs to ensure fairness in civil proceedings, modifying previous orders to enhance justice.
Exorbitant costs cannot be imposed as a condition for setting aside an ex-parte order in maintenance cases.
At a nascent stage of a suit, necessary amendments or corrections can be allowed without prejudicing anyone, including the defendant.
Delay in filing written statements in civil suits may be condoned with reasonable compensatory costs to promote litigation on merits rather than technicalities.
A court's discretion to award costs must be based on clear justification; costs awarded without reasons are unsustainable.
The court maintains discretion in imposing costs in setting aside ex parte judgments, with considerations for delay and securing decree amounts clarified.
The court has the discretion to impose additional costs and give directions to the parties and the Trial Court in the interest of justice.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
