Judge’s meetings with respondent forces appellate court to transfer case
A case was taken away from a judge after the petitioner submitted a video showing the judge and the respondent meeting on several occasions outside the court.mumbai Updated: Sep 25, 2010 03:19 IST
A case was taken away from a judge after the petitioner submitted a video showing the judge and the respondent meeting on several occasions outside the court.
While transferring the case from the Maharashtra State Co-operative Court to another court, the president of the appellate court observed: “The allegations are serious and if this court investigated the same, then it will take much more time.”
Madhyam Vargiya Sarvoday Sahakari Gruha Rachana Sansta Maryadit, a housing society in Pune, had filed the case alleging that five men were falsely representing themselves as members of the society.
The society, which filed the case against Vijaymala Deokar, Mohamad Jafar Jahangir Shaikh, Rajesh Ghadge, Dilip Ghadge and Saroj Naik in the Pune co-operative court, alleged that they had also filed false and vexatious litigations.
However, the case took a dramatic turn in August.
Sunil Kulkarni, former chairman of the society, saw the judge, DV Gavate, with Ghadge at Narayan Peth on August 3.
Kulkarni then got a professional videographer and followed the duo. He found out that Ghadge regularly visited Gavate’s house in Narayan Peth.
On August 8, Kulkarni shot a video of Ghadge picking up the judge and his family in a car from the latter’s residence and visiting an under-construction building at Pashan.
Following Kulkarni’s revelation, the housing society filed an application to transfer the case to another judge.
“The said company of both Ghadge and Judge Gavate, on August 3, raised clouds of suspicion in the mind of Kulkarni and he decided to follow Ghadge and keep an eye on his movements and activities,” the society said in its transfer application.
The society said it felt that the judge was biased towards Ghadge and his judgment is likely to be prejudiced.
However, Ghadge, in his reply filed through his advocate Ramesh Desai, refuted the allegations.
He said the transfer application amounts to interference in the judicial proceedings.
Dilip told Hindustan Times that the “entire video was manipulated”.