Ajit Saxena vs Roshni Rajaram
2023 Latest Caselaw 1179 Del

                                          Neutral Citation Number 2023:DHC:3329



                          $~76
                          *       IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                          %                                   Judgment delivered on: 09.05.2023
                          +       CM(M) 757/2023
                                  AJIT SAXENA                                        ..... Petitioner
                                                     versus
                                  ROSHNI RAJARAM                                   ..... Respondent
                          Advocates who appeared in this case:

                          For the Petitioner         :        Dr. Amit George, Mr. Nitesh Mehra,
                                                              Ms. Hitaakshi Mehra, Ms. Siddhi
                                                              Mittal and Mr. Amol Acharya,
                                                              Advocates

                          For the Respondent        :         None

                          CORAM:
                          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA

                                                     JUDGMENT

TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J. (ORAL)

[ The proceeding has been conducted through Hybrid mode ]

1. CM APPL. 23853/2023

2. Exemption is allowed, subject to all just exceptions

3. The application stands disposed of. CM(M) 757/2023 & CM APPL. 23852/2023 (Stay)

4. The petitioner challenges the order dated 29.04.2023 in CS DJ ADJ No. 589/2022 titled Roshani Rajaram vs. Ajit Saxena whereby the learned Trial Court had imposed costs of Rs.15,000/- on the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/defendant.

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed

Signing Date:13.05.2023 14:57:13 Neutral Citation Number 2023:DHC:3329

5. Dr. Amit George, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/defendant and submits that it is possible that since the counsel for the petitioner was appearing through VC, the communication in respect of the reference to paragraphs 3 and 4 of the replication filed by the respondent/plaintiff may have been taken to be reference to paragraphs 6 and 8 by the learned Trial Court, which is clear from the perusal of the impugned order and in that miscommunication and in addition thereto, the confusion created by the appearance on VC, the learned Trial Court has, in all probabilities, misunderstood the submissions made therein and has imposed costs on the assumption that there is a misdemeanor by the counsel.

6. Dr. George, learned counsel submits that the case may be considered sympathetically and without, in any manner, casting aspersions on the learned Trial Court or otherwise.

7. This Court has considered the submissions of Dr. Goerge, as also perused the impugned order and has considered the confusion in respect of paragraphs 6 and 8 in relation to the communication of learned counsel referring to paragraphs 3 and 4 of the replication.

8. Without commenting or observing anything on the merits of the impugned order and without changing anything therein, this Court is of the opinion that it would be in the interest of justice to set aside the costs as imposed upon the petitioner, leaving the order without any change.

9. Dr. George has submitted that the counsel is a young Advocate at Bar and therefore, the observations in paragraph 4 may be a little harsh.

10. This Court is also of the considered opinion that the observations made by the learned Trial Court in paragraph 4 so far as the counsel

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed

Signing Date:13.05.2023 14:57:13 Neutral Citation Number 2023:DHC:3329

appearing for the petitioner/defendant is concerned, the said observation shall stand expunged from the record of the Court.

11. In that view of the matter, the petition alongwith application stands disposed of.

TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J MAY 9, 2023 Aj

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed

Signing Date:13.05.2023 14:57:13