Back
SUJOY PAUL, PRAKASH CHANDRA GUPTA
SWAGATIKA IMPEX PVT. LTD. , MUMBAI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH – Respondent
ORAL ORDER SUJOY PAUL, J. : – Heard on admission.
2. In this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs : –
(i) This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire record pertaining to impugned order of the respondent bank. (ii) This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the paper publication dated 23-5-2022 published by the respondent No. 3. (iii) This Hon’ble Court may kindly be please to allow any other relief, which this Court Hon’ble Court deemed just and proper in view of aforesaid submissions. (Emphasis Supplied)
3. Shri Shekhar Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned auction notice dated 23-5-2022 (Annexure P/16) is issued under section 13(4) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (in short, ‘Securitisation Act’) read with the relevant rules.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner pursuant to a query urged that petitioner doesn’t have remedy of approaching DRT by filing proceedings under section 17 of the Securitisation Act.
5. Learned counsel for the
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of approaching the court with clean hands and the consequences of suppression of material facts.
Suppression of material facts disentitles a party to invoke equitable jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Point of Law - It is not for a litigant to decide what fact is material for adjudicating a case and what is not material. It is the obligation of a litigant to disclose all the facts of a case and le....
A party invoking writ jurisdiction must disclose all material facts honestly, as suppression and falsehood invalidate claims for equitable relief.
1. At the stage of issuance of notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act, no interference is called for by the Court. 2. No borrower can as a matter of right pray for grant of benefit of OTS sch....
Suppression of material facts and failure to join necessary parties render a writ petition untenable; fraud on the court mandates dismissal of the case.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
