Firm fined for challenging judicial officer's order

Source :Shibu Thomas, TNN, Sep 9, 2010, 12.38am IST


MUMBAI: A firm's attempt to challenge the qualification of a judicial officer after he passed an adverse order backfired in the Bombay high court. A division bench of Justice P B Majmudar and Justice Anoop Mohta imposed a fine of Rs 20,000 on the firm Tiger Jewellery India Pvt Ltd (TJIPL). The firm had alleged that the presiding officer of the Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT), Mumbai, who had passed an order against them, did not have the requisite experience.




The HC did not agree. "The petitioner having lost before the concerned DRT, has tried to take out the present proceedings in which we do not find any substance,'' said the judges. The court said that the judicial officer had to engage an advocate to defend himself and justify his appointment. "In our opinion, this petition is nothing but a vexatious proceeding,'' said the HC and asked the firm to shell out the fine to the parties within two weeks. This follows the recent guidelines by the Supreme Court to impose exemplary costs on persons who file frivolous petitions.



In the present case, proceedings were initiated against TJIPL before the DRT. In June 2009, the presiding officer, Vijay Kumar, rejected TJIPL's plea to keep his case for urgent hearing. Subsequently, TJIPL filed the petition claiming that Kumar was not qualified to head the tribunal as he did not have the requisite qualification of practising as an advocate for seven years.



The Union government pointed out that Kumar belonged to the Indian Legal Service and had enrolled as an advocate in 1978 and represented the Centre in various capacities. He had at least 11 years of practice in various courts. The HC agreed that Kumar was eligible for the post. "It is not necessary that for all these seven years, he should be an actively practising advocate,'' said the court.