Registration Of FIR Is Mandatory If Information Ex Facie Discloses Commission Of  Cognizable Offence: Supreme Court 'No Res Judicata': Supreme Court Holds Rejection Of Section 156(3) CrPC Plea Is No Bar To Subsequent Registration Of FIR Auto Dealers' Referral Charges From Banks & Insurers Constitute 'Business Auxiliary Service', But No Penalty If Tax Paid Before Show Cause Notice: Supreme Court MACT | Appellate Courts Must Liberally Admit Additional Evidence Under Order XLI Rule 27 CPC To Compute 'Just Compensation': Supreme Court MACT | Post-Accident Vehicle Position On Sketch Cannot Be Sole Basis To Infer Contributory Negligence: Supreme Court Enhances Compensation To ₹50.8 Lakhs 'Sanction Under Section 19(1)(c) PC Act Must Be Granted By Removing Authority': Supreme Court Sets Aside Conviction Mere Recovery Of Money Cannot Resurrect Prosecution Proof Of Demand Is Sine Qua: Supreme Court Lok Adalat Awards Without Signatures Of All Rival Claimants Are Invalid, Order I Rule 8 CPC Inapplicable: Supreme Court Lok Adalat Cannot Decide Title Disputes, Mere Physical Possession Doesn't Prove Ownership": Supreme Court Quashes Land Acquisition Awards Power Discoms Can't Escape Liability: Andhra Pradesh High Court Upholds Damages For Death Caused By Snapped Live Wires Lying On Ground Extra-Judicial Confessions To Village Administrative Officers Cannot Be Accepted As Gospel Truth Without Signatures And Corroboration: Madras High Court Acquits Murder Accused 'Article 21 Trumps UAPA Rigors': Allahabad High Court Grants Bail To PFI Members After 5 Years In Jail Due To 'Sluggish' Trial" Daughters Cannot Be Denied Equal Share: Orissa High Court Upholds Compensation Apportionment In Favor Of Daughters Under Hindu Succession Act Cannot Reopen Closed Chapter Years Later: Calcutta High Court Dismisses BSF Ex-Head Constable's Plea Claiming Voluntary Retirement Was Extracted Under Coercion Long-Standing Relationship And Public Recognition Prove Valid Marriage: Karnataka High Court Upholds Second Wife's Right To 1/3rd Share In Property Collector Becomes Functus Officio Once Duty Is Determined: Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes Penalty On Stamp Duty Deficiency Eyewitness Testimony Contradicted By Medical Evidence Cannot Sustain Murder Conviction: Madhya Pradesh High Court Acquits Woman In IPC 302 Case

Punjab and Haryana High Court Rejects Revision Petition Due to Concealment of Vital Facts, Imposes Exemplary Costs of Rs. 1 Lakh

04 September 2024 11:03 AM

By: Admin


In a significant legal development, the Punjab and Haryana High Court, in a judgement delivered on August 10, 2023, dismissed a revision petition challenging an eviction order. The petitioner's attempt to mislead the court by concealing vital facts played a pivotal role in the court's decision.

Justice Vikram Aggarwal, while pronouncing the judgement, highlighted the importance of full disclosure in legal proceedings. The court observed, "Litigants approaching the court must adhere to the principle of clean hands. Attempts to mislead and deceive the court by withholding vital information are not only frowned upon but are also against the very essence of justice."

The case centered around an eviction petition filed by the respondent-decree holder against the petitioner-judgment debtor, seeking possession of a shop. The court took note of the fact that the petitioner had filed a Special Leave Petition (SLP) before the Supreme Court, which was later withdrawn. However, the petitioner failed to disclose this crucial aspect before both the executing court and the High Court during the revision proceedings.

Justice Aggarwal emphasized that the petitioner's concealment of facts amounted to an attempt to deceive the court and mislead the legal process. The court cited legal precedents, underscoring that litigants approaching the court must do so with the utmost transparency. The court's decision highlighted that those who initiate proceedings without full disclosure of facts and attempt to gain an advantage by withholding crucial information are not entitled to relief.

The judgement reiterated the well-established principle that courts expect litigants to approach them with clean hands. The court expressed that such principles are fundamental to maintaining the integrity of the judicial process and ensuring that justice is served in a fair and transparent manner.

In light of the petitioner's conduct, the court not only dismissed the revision petition but also imposed exemplary costs of Rs. 1,00,000/- on the petitioner. This cost is to be deposited with the High Court Legal Services Committee within a specified timeframe. The court also directed that, in case of non-compliance, the costs would be recovered as arrears of land revenue.

Date of Decision: 10.08.2023

Sukhdev Singh vs Mulkh Raj 

Latest Legal News