Himachal Pradesh high court pulls up lower court for admitting frivolous complaint

Shimla: The Himachal Pradesh high court has pulled up a lower court for admitting a frivolous complaint without any provision of the law.
While referring to a petition, the high court observed that the instant revision petition reflects dismal picture where the subordinate courts, without even caring to go through the contents of the complaints, not only entertain such suits but randomly issue notices to the opposite parties.
The move compelled them to incur unnecessary and otherwise avoidable expenses in defending such litigations and making them go through the ordeal and agony of a full-fledged unnecessary trial, the court observed.
In a judgment pronounced on Monday, Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan said appeals arising out of such frivolous and otherwise not maintainable litigations were carried forward not only to the first appellate court, but examples were not wanting where such kind of cases had even reached the Supreme Court. The HC order came in response to a case between a Bilaspur resident and the then deputy commissioner (DC) of Bilaspur.
Respondent Madan Lal Sharma of Bilaspur district had filed three appeals under the Right to Information Act before petitioner Manasi Sahay Thakur, who being the then Bi;aspur DC was exercising the powers of an appellate authority under the RTI Act, and the same were decided vide order dated July 23, 2015.
Sharma, thereafter, issued a legal notice to Thakur stating therein that the latter had denied him the right to engage a counsel and, therefore, she was liable to pay damages to the tune of Rs one lakh along with interest @ 15% till the realization of payment along with the legal notice fee.
Thakur responded to the legal notice, however, the reply did not deter Sharma from filing the suit for recovery of the aforesaid amount, which he did before the trial court.
However, the trial court dismissed the application vide order dated September 4 last year by observing that since Sharma had not assailed the order passed by Thakur under the RTI Act and had rather filed a suit on the basis of violation of his legal right, whereby Thakur had refused to accept the power of attorney of Sharma's counsel and, hence. the suit was maintainable. Thakur filed the instant petition against the said order.