Topic
Bombay High Court rules that unauthorised constructions lack legal validity even with municipal assessment records or private agreements. The Court underscores that subsequent permissions cannot regularise illegal structures, reinforcing strict compliance with sanctioned plans for property legality.
Bombay High Court dismisses a writ petition under Article 226 after finding the petitioner misrepresented a hotel as a residential property and suppressed statutory permissions. The court invoked the principles of 'fraud on court' and judicial estoppel, reinforcing that litigants cannot seek equitable relief through misrepresentation or concealment of material facts.
Karnataka High Court dismisses writ petitions after finding litigants suppressed material facts and tampered with execution records to claim Railway property. The Court reaffirms that suppression of truth amounts to fraud on court, barring equitable relief under the Doctrine of Clean Hands.
The Bombay High Court dismissed a writ petition after finding the petitioner submitted a forged affidavit, verified by the notary’s register and sworn statement. The court invoked the clean hands doctrine, emphasizing that courts will not entertain litigants who deceive the judiciary - setting a clear precedent for accountability in constitutional litigation and deterring future misuse of judicial process.
Karnataka High Court reinforces the liberal approach under Order VI Rule 17 CPC, permitting amendments to pleadings to challenge fraud-based decrees as null and void, provided the amendment does not cause prejudice and is not barred by limitation. The ruling clarifies that such amendments do not relate back to the original suit date, balancing procedural flexibility with substantive justice.
The Bombay High Court has ruled that submitting a fabricated affidavit in a concluded petition to circumvent a judicial undertaking amounts to fraud on the court, triggering prosecution under CrPC 340. The Tehsildar responsible was penalized with a six-month salary deduction, setting a precedent for holding public officials accountable for undermining judicial orders through procedural deceit.
The Punjab & Haryana High Court ruled that anticipatory bail granted on the basis of a fraudulent compromise-where the accused failed to fulfill promised payments-is invalid, regardless of whether the accused misused their liberty post-bail. The decision reinforces that deceit in securing bail vitiates the order, setting a precedent for scrutinizing compromise agreements in bail proceedings under BNSS.
Bombay High Court holds that obtaining a consent decree by suppressing a prior order rejecting the same terms amounts to fraud on court, invalidating the decree and appointing a receiver.