The Hon'ble High Court disposed of a writ appeal filed against the single judge's award of Rs.1,00,000 costs to the Secunderabad Contonment Board. The court reduced the costs to Rs.25,000 while confirming the rest of the impugned order.
Costs of Rs.1,00,000 reduced to Rs.25,000; remainder of the single judge's order confirmed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA AND
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR
W.A.No.375 of 2013
Date: 05-07-2013
Between:
Secunderabad Contonment Board
… Appellant
Ganesh Savarkar
… Respondent
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR
W.A.No.375 of 2013
JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice N.V. Ramana)
This writ appeal is filed aggrieved by the order dated
28-01-2013 in W.P.No.357 of 2012, whereby the learned single Judge, while allowing the writ petition, imposed costs of Rs.1,00,000/- on the appellant-board on the ground that their action resulted in undue denial of the respondent’s right to get the building plan sanctioned, and had caused mental agony and serious financial loss to him due to escalation of cost of construction.
2. Heard the learned standing counsel for the appellantboard as well as the learned counsel for the respondent.
3. Learned standing counsel for the appellant-board contends that the learned single Judge, without considering the
laches on the part of the respondent, imposed huge costs of Rs.1,00,000/- on the appellant-board without any valid reasons, and hence he submits that the order of the learned single Judge to that extent is liable to be set aside.
4. The appeal is directed only against the award of costs. The learned counsel contends that the officers of the Cantonment Board on their own understanding have passed orders which are now found to be unsustainable by the Court. However, the action of the officers being bona fide, the learned counsel seeks that award of costs be set aside.
5. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, without going into the merits of the matter, we are inclined to reduce the costs to Rs.25,000/-.
6. Accordingly, the writ appeal is disposed of reducing the costs from Rs.1,00,000/- to Rs.25,000/-.
The rest of the order stands confirmed. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. No order as to costs.
N.V. RAMANA, J
VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J
Date:05-07-2013 YCR
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the award of costs of Rs.1,00,000 to the appellant ought to be reduced.
Whether bona fide actions of officers warrant setting aside costs despite lack of consideration of laches.
Secunderabad Contonment Board
Ganesh Savarkar
N.V. Ramana
Vilas V. Afzulpurkar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
