Additional Senior Civil Judge Kishor Kumar also issued a show cause notice to the man asking why a complaint should not be made against him for raising a false claim, noting that he abused the court process and such practices require iron-hand handling.
The litigant had filed the suit claiming that that family properties were orally partitioned between legal heirs after the death of his father in 1989. A property in Delhi Moti Nagar area was transferred in the name of his mother and it was agreed that after her death, it would devolve in his name exclusively.
However, he alleged that in 2017 his brother refused to vacate the property after the death of their mother and a year later he came to know that his brother was trying to get it in his name by using false and fabricated documents in collusion and connivance with the officials of Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board.
Dismissing the suit, the judge said that the plaintiff filed an absolutely false and frivolous case before the court when he claimed on oath that an oral partition took place after his father’s demise and that according to it, the suit property fell into his share.
“Filing of false claims in courts aim at striking a blow at the rule of law and no court can ignore such conduct which has a tendency to shake public confidence in the judicial institution because the very structure of an ordered life is put at stake. It would be a great public disaster if the fountain of justice is allowed to be poisoned by anyone resorting to filing false claims, he emphasised.
The judge added, These all are the false pleas. To counter that these are not the false pleas, the plaintiff has not filed any replication. The suit, based on false and frivolous pleas which the plaintiff and his counsel very well knew, is hereby dismissed with cost of Rs 2 lacs, the civil judge said in an order dated October 11.
He directed him to deposit Rs 1 lakh with District Legal Service Authority (DLSA), Rs 50,000 with his brother and Rs 50,000 with Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board who have been directed to utilise it for demolishing the back portion of the property which is allegedly illegally encroached upon by him.
He held that the litigant did not approach the court with clean hands and suppressed the material facts. This issue is accordingly decided in favour of defendant no.1 [brother] and against the plaintiff, the court said.
In a reply to the suit, his brother had stated that their mother sold the property to him on September 2, 2000 and died in 2005. He alleged that the litigant made up a cooked up story.
(Cover: Representational image: Getty images)
The weather office has forecast a partly cloudy sky, with the maximum temperature expected to…
Residents across Delhi report stagnant water, damaged roads and clogged drains despite ongoing pre-monsoon desilting…
Delhi brings 23 more services under its time-bound delivery system to speed up approvals, licences…
Delhi High Court dismissed BSES petitions against a proposed CAG audit, terming the challenge premature
Teachers' body alleges restrictive interpretation of promotion norms is delaying career advancement and urges DU…
CM assures accountability, stronger safety measures as families of Saidulajab and Malviya Nagar victims receive…
