Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5 (0.18 seconds)The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
E. P. Royappa vs State Of Tamil Nadu & Anr on 23 November, 1973
"83. Allegations of mala fide are serious in nature and they essentially
raise a question of fact. It is, therefore, necessary for the person making
such allegations to supply full particulars in the petition. If sufficient
averments and requisite materials are not on record, the court would not
make "fishing" or roving inquiry. Mere assertion, vague averment or bald
statement is not enough to hold the action to be mala fide. It must be
demonstrated by facts. Moreover, the burden of proving mala fide is on
the person levelling such allegations and the burden is "very heavy" (vide
E.P. Royappa v. State of T.N.19). The charge of mala fide is more easily
made than made out. As stated by Krishna Iyer, J. in Gulam Mustafa v.
Ajit Kumar Nag vs General Manager (Pj), Indian Oil ... on 6 February, 2004
(2007) 8 SCC 418
WP(C) Nos.19520/2021, 19634/2022, 29714/2023, 31579/2023
54
2025:KER:7676
State of Maharashtra 20 it is the last refuge of a losing litigant (see also
Ajit Kumar Nag v. GM(PJ), Indian Oil Corpn.21). In the case on hand,
except alleging that the policy was altered by the Government, to extend
the benefit to Respondent 4, no material whatsoever has been placed on
record by the appellant. We are, therefore, unable to uphold the
contention of the learned counsel that the impugned action is mala fide
or malicious." (emphasis supplied)
Result:
U.B.S. Publishers Distributors Ltd. vs Industrial Workers Union & Anr on 16 October, 1997
8.1 In U B S Publishers and Distributors, Limited v. Industrial
Workers Union2, the High Court at Bombay in paragraph 11 is held thus:
1