Delhi High Court Imposes Cost Of ₹50K For Casting Fictious And Fallacious Aspersions On Sitting Judge

The Delhi High Court has imposed a cost of ₹50,000/- on two litigants for trying to cast unwarranted, fictious and fallacious aspersions by making flimsy, misleading and mythical assertions on a sitting Judge of the Trial Court.

The Court was considering a Transfer Petition seeking transfer of a case relating to a Suit for Recovery of Rent, mesne profits, and damages before Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi to any other competent Court within the same district.

The Bench of Justice Saurabh Banerjee observed, "The petitioners by way of the present petition are trying to cast unwarranted, fictious and fallacious aspersions by making flimsy, misleading and mythical assertions on a sitting Judge of the learned Trial Court, which are not only contrary to the records before this Court but also without any backing thereto. This Court, in any event, takes a serious objection to the filing of the present petition, and that too by making and cooking up an imaginary story."

The Petitioner was represented by Advocate Indira Goswami, while the Respondent was represented by Advocate Shruti Kapur.

It was the case of Counsel for the Petitioners that the transfer from the Court of present ADJ is sought since he had allegedly addressed one of the persons standing in the Court in a friendly manner, who, according to them was with the Respondents. 

The Court noted that on July 17, 2025, the case itself was referred for mediation before the Delhi Mediation Cell and the parties appeared for it on July 21, 2025. It further noted that one of the Petitioner once again appeared in person along with the Counsel for the Petitioners before the  ADJ when the case was listed on August 28, 2025.

It also noted that the Counsel for Petitioners also agreed that the very same Petitioners had filed their written statement alongwith the statement of truth and admission/ denial affidavit of the documents of the Respondents/ Plaintiffs prior to July 21, 2025 itself.

"Surprisingly, despite thereto, the petitioners have chosen neither to aver anything qua them in detail nor to file any of the aforesaid before this Court. However, all the orders have been handed over by learned counsel for the respondents appearing on advance notice", the Court observed.

It was thus of the view that the Petition was based on mere whims and fancies and was nothing but a figment of the infertile imagination of the petitioners, with bald assertions, without any basis.

The Petition was accordingly dismissed with cost of ₹50,000/-

Cause Title: Neeti Sharma & Anr. v. Kailash Chand Gupta & Ors.

Click here to read/ download Order