Telangana High Court imposes fine of Rs.1 crore on petitioner for ‘abusing’ judicial process

The court found that the petitioner misrepresented material facts and engaged in frivolous litigation to pursue a personal agenda

Hyderabad: Justice Nagesh Bheemapaka of the Telangana High Court on Friday imposed a hefty fine of Rs 1 crore on a petitioner for ‘abusing the judicial process’ and suppressing facts while claiming ownership of government land. The court found that the petitioner, Venkata Rami Reddy, had misrepresented material facts and engaged in frivolous litigation to pursue a personal agenda.

Reddy had filed a writ petition claiming ownership of 9.11 acres of land located in Kandikal Village, Hyderabad, asserting that his father had acquired the land through a registered sale deed in 1980. According to the petitioner, the land was originally classified as ‘Abadi’ (residential), but due to an error in revenue records, it was incorrectly recorded. Despite alleged corrections in the records, the petitioner argued that the Town Survey Records continued to show the wrong classification.

Reddy’s counsel, Kandagatla Deeraj, further accused the Tahsildar and Revenue Department of attempting to unlawfully seize the land without due process. However, government authorities countered the petitioner’s claims, arguing that the land in question was government property and part of the land bank. They asserted that Reddy and his father had no legitimate claim to the land and were attempting to encroach upon it using fabricated documents. The respondents also noted that multiple legal proceedings, including a civil suit and a second appeal, had already been decided in favor of the government.

Justice Bheemapaka, in his ruling, observed that the petitioner had failed to disclose several important facts regarding prior litigation involving the same land. It was revealed that both Reddy and his father had filed several writ petitions, all of which had either been dismissed or withdrawn. Despite this, the petitioner deliberately chose not to mention these past cases while filing the current petition, thereby misleading the court. The judge also criticised the petitioner for “forum shopping,” a tactic in which different benches of the court were approached with slightly altered petitions in a bid to obtain favorable orders. Justice Bheemapaka condemned this as a deliberate manipulation of the judicial system and an abuse of legal proceedings.

Emphasising the importance of truth and transparency in legal matters, Justice Bheemapaka ruled that Reddy had not approached the court with unclean hands, and his conduct amounted to a deliberate concealment of material facts for personal gain. The judge highlighted that frivolous litigation burdens the judicial system and obstructs genuine cases from being resolved promptly.

In a stern warning to discourage similar misuse of legal remedies, the court imposed an exemplary penalty of Rs. 1 crore, which must be paid to the High Court Legal Services Authority by April 10.