ASHOK KUMAR MITTAL Vs. RAM KUMAR GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mrs. Amita Gupta, learned counsel, appears for respondents and waives notice.

(2.) The petitioner filed a suit for specific performance of an alleged agreement of sale dated 15.7.2003. The trial court dismissed the suit by judgment and decree dated 19.5.2008. The High Court dismissed the petitioners appeal on 29.9.2008. Both courts held that petitioner had not approached the court with clean hands and that he had failed to prove any concluded contract for sale. High Court found that the defendants in the suit were also not above board in their conduct. It found that both sides were guilty of having lied on oath and deserved to be prosecuted. On the ground that courts were over-burdened with litigation, the High Court decided that instead of directing prosecution, heavy costs should be levied on both petitioner and respondents "to be paid to the State which spends money on providing the judicial infrastructure." It then proceeded to impose exemplary costs of Rs. 1,00,000/- on the petitioner and Rs. 1,00,000/- on the respondents, and directed that the costs should be deposited with the Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee.

(3.) Feeling aggrieved by the dismissal of his appeal, the petitioner is before this Court. On merits, we find that the concurrent findings of the trial court and the High Court do not warrant interference and therefore this is not a fit case for grant of leave.