Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

16. As rightly pointed out by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner, the allegations made in Paragraph Nos.8, 9 & 10 of the Plaint are repetition of Paragraph Nos.5 & 6 of the Affidavit filed in support of W.P. No. 12543 of 2013. Therefore, this Court cannot brush aside the contention of the learned Counsel for the Civil Revision Petitioner that the 1st Respondent/Plaintiff has been set up by the Petitioner in W.P. No.12543 of 2013, namely, Mr. P.S.P.K. Maragatharaja Pandian, who failed to obtain favourable orders from this Court. Approaching the Civil Court to overcome the Orders passed by this Court is a fraudulent act. The parties are expected to approach the Court with clean hands. If any of the parties abuse the forum, the said proceedings are liable to be struck off as held by the Honourable Supreme Court in K.K. Modi v. K.N. Modi and others, 1998 (3) SCC 573. The Honourable Apex Court, in the said Judgment, held that Relitigation is an abuse of process of Court and Paragraph 44 of the said Judgment is usefully extracted as follows:

44. One of the examples cited as an abuse of process of the Court is relitigation. It is an abuse of process of the Court and contrary to justice and public policy for a party to relitigate the same issue which has already been tried and decided earlier against him. The reagitation may or may not be barred as res judicata. But if the same issue is sought to be reagitated, it also amounts to an abuse of the process of the Court. A proceeding being filed for a collateral purpose, or a spurious claim being made in litigation may also in a given set of facts amount to an abuse of the process of the Court. Frivolous or vexatious proceedings may also amount to an abuse of the process of the Court especially where the proceedings are absolutely groundless. The Court then has the power to stop such proceedings summarily and prevent the time of the public and the Court from being wasted.