JUDGMENT
Prasad Sandosham Abraham J:
[1] Enclosure 1 was an application by the plaintiff to declare the defendant a vexatious litigant pursuant to the Court of Judicature Act 1964 (Act 91) the said Act and the schedule to s 25(2) of the said Act and the additional Powers of the High Court particularly s 17 of the Schedule. Enclosure 5 was an application by the defendant by way of summons in chambers to strike out encl 1.
[2] The plaintiff moves this Court to bar the defendant, subject to the leave of a Judge from instituting any legal proceedings in Court because the plaintiff has habitually and persistently and without reasonable cause instituted vexatious legal proceedings in Court. In determining this question the Court will have to look at the whole sequence of litigation initiated by the defendant to see whether the defendant fell came within the barometers of the said Act bearing in mind, the order being sought is rather draconian in its effects and should be exercised sparingly (See Re Vernazza [1959] 2 AER pg. 200) particularly at page 202 of the report where it was held:
"in determining whether proceedings were vexatious the Court must look at the whole histor
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.