The Delhi High Court recently imposed costs of ₹50,000 on a lawyer and litigant for filing a petition without the litigant’s signature [Madhu Gupta vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Others]..The petition seeking removal of illegal construction of property in Delhi was filed with the lawyer's signature alone.The Court counsel appearing for Delhi Development Authority pointed out that the petition has not been signed by the petitioner but only by the advocate representing the petitioner, Farhad Alam.The Court was also informed that the mobile number and email details provided in the complaint filed before the Special Task Force regarding the alleged illegal construction, belongs to the counsel and not the petitioner. The Court observed that the details of the advocate in the petition matched with the complainant’s details on STF portal. .Justice Mini Pushkarna took strong exception to advocates filing complaints against unauthorised construction themselves and moving court without the signature of the litigant. “On account of the glaring facts presented before this Court, with regard the conduct of the petitioner and the counsel thereof, this Court has taken a very serious view of the matter, where complaints against unauthorised construction are being filed by advocates themselves, and writ petition is being filed without the signatures of the purported litigant,” the Court stated. .This is clearly an abuse and misuse of the process of law and the process of the Court cannot be misused for ulterior motives, the single-judge observed. The Municipal Corporation of Delhi apprised the Court that requisite action is already being taken with regard to the illegal construction.Accordingly, the petition was dismissed with costs of ₹50,000 to be borne jointly by the petitioner and the advocate. “Considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, as noted above, the present writ petition is dismissed with cost of ₹50,000 to be borne jointly by both the petitioner and the counsel, to be paid towards the Delhi High Court Advocates Welfare Trust,” the Court directed. .The matter will now be heard by the Joint Registrar on July 21 for compliance with the directions to pay costs..Advocate Farhad Alam appeared for the petitioner.Advocates Abhinav Singh and Somnath Shukla appeared for the MCD.Standing Counsel Prabhsahay Kaur with advocates Kavya Shukla and Harshita Rai appeared for DDA.Senior Panel Counsel Vinish Phoghat appeared for Union of India. [Read Judgment]
