In a successful defamation case against false allegation of wife, a court in MP has awarded 2 lakh damages to be given to a man who was alleged to be impotent by ex-wife. http://ibnlive.in.com/news/woman-says-exhusband-impotent-to-pay-damages/127603-3.html?from=prestory Harda (MP): A local court has ordered a woman to give Rs 2 lakh as compensation to her estranged husband for alleging that he was impotent. District and Sessions Judge Jagdish Prasad Parashar asked Vandana Gurjar to compensate her ex-husband Hemant Chhalotre while delivering his judgement on Monday in a defamation case filed by the latter. Hemant had argued that Vandana's false allegation had rendered him "unmarriageable" and sullied his prestige. The duo had tied the nuptial knot nine years ago but separated three … [Read more...] about Wife to pay 2 lakh damages for alleging husband was impotent
Process misuse
Delhi High Court exposes how lawyers do ‘business’ in India
The following recent judgment of Justice Dhingra of Delhi HC exposes how lawyers make flimsy excuses to delay cases and put both litigants and witnesses to hardship. But the larger question is that if the lawyers are doing it, then why are not the judges putting exemplary costs to discourage such behaviour, as done in this case by having petitioner pay the respondent Rs 25,000. The important parts are made bold in judgment below: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://lobis.nic.in/dhc/SND/judgement/10-03-2010/SND09032010CMM4962009.pdf CM (M) No. 496/2009 Smt. Rampyari & Ors.v. Ms. Kamlesh * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Reserve: 2nd February, 2010 Date of Order: 9th March, 2010 CM (M) … [Read more...] about Delhi High Court exposes how lawyers do ‘business’ in India
Petitioner to pay cost on frivolous petition
In this Delhi HC judgment, petitioner was made to pay cost of Rs 10,000 due to frivolous petition and causing delays in judicial process.Case of: Shri Manoj Sharma vs Shri Naresh GuptaExcerpts of judgment below:6. The record shows that petitioner is only interested in delaying the trial of caseand the criminal complaint is pending before the trial court since 2001 and therespondent has been cross-examined as far as back in the year 2004. Nowhere thepetitioner has taken the plea of the alleged receipt executed on 10th February, 2001. There is nothing on record to show that the petitioner has ever taken this defenceeven in the reply sent in response to notice, under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Under these circumstances … [Read more...] about Petitioner to pay cost on frivolous petition