Tarnjit Singh Gill v Sanjay Anand & Anor

Tarnjit Singh Gill v Sanjay Anand & Anor

The First Defendant's breaches of court orders were serious and significant. His mental health and personal difficulties did not constitute good reason for default, as he was periodically able to engage with litigation and give instructions. The delay and pattern of non-compliance disrupted proceedings and undermined efficiency and compliance. Relief from sanctions was refused as granting it would likely result in further defaults and prejudice to the Claimant.

Parties
Claimant: Tarnjit Singh Gill; First Defendant: Sanjay Anand; Second Defendant: Bobby Singh
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 April 2026
Procedural Posture
Civil / Application for Relief From Sanctions Following Judgment and Assessment
Outcome
Application for relief from sanctions dismissed.
Legal Topics
Relief From Sanctions, Summary Judgment, Compliance With Court Orders, Mental Health and Litigation Capacity
Civil Procedure Relief From Sanctions Summary Judgment Compliance With Court Orders Mental Health and Litigation Capacity

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tarnjit Singh Gill

Claimant

Sanjay Anand

First Defendant

Bobby Singh

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Application for Relief From Sanctions Following Judgment and Assessment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the First Defendant should be granted relief from sanctions under CPR 3.9
  2. 2 Whether the requirement to pay £350,000 into court should be varied
  3. 3 Whether the breaches of court orders were serious and significant

Ratio Decidendi

The First Defendant's breaches of court orders were serious and significant. His mental health and personal difficulties did not constitute good reason for default, as he was periodically able to engage with litigation and give instructions. The delay and pattern of non-compliance disrupted proceedings and undermined efficiency and compliance. Relief from sanctions was refused as granting it would likely result in further defaults and prejudice to the Claimant.

Court Disposition

Application for relief from sanctions dismissed.

Orders

  • First Defendant's application for relief from sanctions is refused.
  • No variation of the payment into court order is made.