IN THE HON’BLE COURT OF SH.
HARVINDER
SINGH JOHAL, LD., DISTRICT JUDGE-02 PATIALA
HOSUE COURT, NEW DELHI
PC/30/2024
IN THE MATTER OF:
MD.AUSIM QURESHI PETITIONER
VERSUS
STATE (NCT OF DELHI) RESPONDENT
APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 151 CPC ON
BEHALF OF COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER FOR
WAIVER OF COST IMPOSED VIDE ORDER DATED
18.03.2025.
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:
1. That the aforementioned matter is listed before the
Hon’ble Court on 14.05.2025.
2. That Hon’ble Court had on the last date of hearing i.e.,
18.03.2025, was pleased to impose a cost of Rs, 10,000/-
upon the petitioner to be paid to AVLAMBAN FUND
SCHEME 2024 bearing Account No.43599660056 and
further gave directions to take steps for publication of
citation in newspaper subject to payment of aforesaid cost,
for the reasons that petitioner failed to take steps and
comply the order 21.09.2024.
3. That it is submitted that learned predecessor of the
Hon’ble Court had directed the petitioner to issue citations
by publication vide order dated 21.09.2024 and case was
fixed for hearing for 13.01.2025.
4. That it is pertinent to mention herein that counsel for the
petitioner fall ill due to acute stomach illness and was
taking treatment since October, 2024 but his health could
not improve and was diagnosed with and acute typhoid
and liver abases and due to the critical health condition
counsel for the petitioner was admitted to hospital for
treatment. That counsel for the petitioner was under
treatment from the period of October 2024 till January,
2025 and doctor had advised him complete best rest. A
copy of the relevant medical documents is annexed
herewith for reference.
5. That on 13.01.2025, when the health of counsel improves
a bit, he himself appeared before the Hon’ble Court for
requesting to grant one more opportunity to comply with
direction of the last order dated 21.09.2025, but the
Hon’ble Court was not presiding and due to said reasons,
said direction could not be issued again due to non-
presiding of the Hon’ble Court on 13.01.2025.
6. That counsel for the petitioner also requested court staff to
permit him to comply the previous direction of the
Hon’ble vide order dated 21.09.2024 but he was informed
that said court order has to be again taken from the
Hon’ble Court, but due to non-presiding of the court by
the Hon’ble PO, the said direction was not again issued
and due to said reasons, steps for publication of citation in
newspaper was not taken, which was inadvertent and in
Bonafide.
7. That the delay in complying direction of order dated
21.09.2024 passed by this Hon’ble Court, was inadvertent
and for the reasons that counsel for the petitioner was not
well and was advised by the doctor for complete bed rest.
8. That it is respectfully prayed that the cost imposed by this
Hon’ble Court may be waived of in light of the aforesaid
facts, therefore, the order of this Hon’ble Court has been
effectively complied by the petitioner.
9. That the petitioner is poor and is financially weak, who
has a responsibility of his family member and would
suffer loss and injury in case if the prayers sought in the
present Application are not granted due to wrongs of his
counsel.
10. That the delay in complying the order dated 21.09.2024
was not deliberated and same was due to reasons that
counsel for the petitioner was not well and was not in
communication with the petitioner.
11. That due to renovation and painting of the office of the counsel,
the office was temporarily shifted to other place and during the said
shifting, the file of the case was misplaced from the office of the
counsel and was not traceable. After numerous and thorough
searching if every file, the copy of case was traced out and due to said
reasons, the present application was not filed soon after the
pronouncement of the last order.
12. While imposing heavy costs, Courts must also look into
the paying capacity of the litigant and ensure that a poor
client does not suffer. Supreme Court in Vinod Seth v.
Devinder Bajaj [18] observed that no person with genuine
claim should suffer and costs must not to deter a person of
the weaker section.
13. That court must be proportionality to the costs and if
they are unreasonable, the doubt would be resolved in
favour of the paying party.
14. That there is no impediment in grant of the reliefs
prayed for in the present Application either in facts or law.
It is further submitted that no harm or prejudice shall be
caused to the respondent if the present application is
allowed.
15. That the present Application is being moved bona fide,
in the interest of justice and to save the precious time of
this Hon’ble Court.
PRAYER
Under the circumstances, it is most respectfully prayed that
this Hon’ble Court may kindly and graciously be pleased to:
a. Waive the cost of Rs.10,000/-, imposed upon the
petitioner on 18.03.2025, in the interest of justice.
b. Pass any order/orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit,
and proper in the facts of the present case.
YAKUB RAZA,
ADVOCATE
Ch. No. E-516, Block-E
Place: New Delhi Karkardooma Courts, Delhi-110032
Dated: 04.2025
IN THE HON’BLE COURT OF SH. HARVINDER
SINGH JOHAL, LD., DISTRICT JUDGE-02 PATIALA
HOSUE COURT, NEW DELHI
PC/30/2024
IN THE MATTER OF:
MD.AUSIM QURESHI PETITIONER
VERSUS
STATE (NCT OF DELHI) RESPONDENT
AFFIDAVIT
I, Yakub Raza, Advocate, enroll no. D/4825/2018,
Chamber No. E-516, Karkardooma Courts Complex,
Delhi-110032 do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as
under: -
3. That I am the Counsel for the Petitioner in the aforesaid
matter as such, I am competent to swear this affidavit.
4. That the contents of the accompanying Application are
true and correct to my knowledge. The contents of the
accompanying Application may be read as part and
parcel of this affidavit as the same are not being
repeated herein for the sake of brevity.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION:
Verified at New Delhi on this day of April, 2025, that the
contents of the above affidavit are true and correct to the
best of my knowledge and no part of it is false and nothing
material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
