SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1995 Supreme(Guj) 443

R.R.JAIN, S.M.SONI
YOGESH P. SUKHANANDI – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: P.S.CHAMPANERI, SADHANA SAGAR

S. M. SONI, J.

( 1 ) BOTH these applications are filed for non-compliance of the same order passed on 21-11-1991 in Special Civil Application No. 6777 of 1491. By the said order, this Court (Coram C. K. Thakkar, J.) directed the authorities to decide the application in the light of the observations made in the order with a further direction to decide the same expeditiously and preferably before 31/12/1991.

( 2 ) WE are of the view that jurisdiction under Contempt of Courts Act should not be exercised in favour of the persons who have no regard for the turth. If the order is obtained by suppressing material facts, the party concerned will hesitate to enforce that order and when it is brought to the notice of this Court that in fact and in substance the said order came to be passed on suppression of material facts which were within the exclusive knowledge of the petitioner, this Court should refuse to exercise jurisdictio~ under the Contempt of Courts Act, So is the case in these applications.

( 3 ) IN view of the affidavit in reply. it is clear that the following facts were suppressed by the petitioner and if the petitioner would have disclosed these facts, no Court would have passed







Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top