Pradeep Singh Ahluwalia vs Karamveer Singh Bevli

Prathiba M. Singh, J

The petition challenges orders dated 30th September, 2019 and 25th January, 2020 by which a total of Rs. 5,000/- as costs, has been imposed upon

the Petitioner herein/Plaintiff. It is the submission of ld. counsel for the Plaintiff that the Trial Court has mentioned that an application under Order

XXVI Rule 19 CPC was pending, however, it was an application under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 CPC. Thus the trial court order is liable to be set

aside.

A perusal of the record shows that the Plaintiff had sought an adjournment on 30th September, 2019 before the trial court as the Plaintiff was

travelling abroad and accordingly, adjournment was granted after imposing Rs. 2,000/- as costs. When an application for recall was filed, the said

application has been dismissed with further costs of Rs. 3,000/-.

This court while exercising jurisdiction under Art. 227 cannot micromanage trial court proceedings. Imposition of costs under circumstances which

may justify the same, is a prerogative of the trial court. In order to ensure speedy disposal and dissuade parties from seeking adjournments, Courts are

constrained to impose costs. Thus, the orders are not liable to be interfered with.

However, the observations made by the Trial Court while imposing costs, may affect the Plaintiff’s right of seeking fair adjudication on merits

at the final stage. Accordingly, while not disturbing the costs which have been imposed, it is directed that the observations contained in the impugned

orders would not come in the way of the final adjudication on merits.

The petition along with the pending applications is disposed of in these terms.

                                  Â