"Party Autonomy is the Backbone of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Upholds Sole Arbitrator Appointment Despite Party’s Attempts to Frustrate Arbitration Proceedings    |     Reasonable Doubt Arising from Sole Testimony in Absence of Corroboration, Power Cut Compounded Identification Difficulties: Supreme Court Acquits Appellants in Murder Case    |     ED Can Investigate Without FIRs: PH High Court Affirms PMLA’s Broad Powers    |     Accident Claim | Contributory Negligence Cannot Be Vicariously Attributed to Passengers: Supreme Court    |     Default Bail | Indefeasible Right to Bail Prevails: Allahabad High Court Faults Special Judge for Delayed Extension of Investigation    |     “Habitual Offenders Cannot Satisfy Bail Conditions Under NDPS Act”: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Bail to Accused with Extensive Criminal Record    |     Delhi High Court Denies Substitution for Son Due to 'Gross Unexplained Delay' of Over Six Years in Trademark Suit    |     Section 4B of the Tenancy Act Cannot Override Land Exemptions for Public Development: Bombay High Court    |     Suspicion, However High, Is Not a Substitute for Proof: Calcutta High Court Orders Reinstatement of Coast Guard Officer Dismissed on Suspicion of Forgery    |     Age Not Conclusively Proven, Prosecutrix Found to be a Consenting Party: Chhattisgarh High Court Acquits Accused in POCSO Case    |     'Company's Absence in Prosecution Renders Case Void': Himachal High Court Quashes Complaint Against Pharma Directors    |     Preventive Detention Cannot Sacrifice Personal Liberty on Mere Allegations: J&K High Court Quashes Preventive Detention of Local Journalist    |     J.J. Act | Accused's Age at Offense Critical - Juvenility Must Be Addressed: Kerala High Court Directs Special Court to Reframe Charges in POCSO Case    |     Foreign Laws Must Be Proved Like Facts: Delhi HC Grants Bail in Cryptocurrency Money Laundering 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 

Similar News