Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 11 (0.28 seconds)Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Pohla Singh @ Pohla Ram (D)By Lrs. & Ors vs State Of Punjab & Ors on 5 May, 2004
17.Coming to the decisions on which reliance has been placed on by the
learned counsel for the petitioners in Pohla Singh's case, the Hon'ble Supreme
Court held that if a decision rendered in a writ petition adversely affects the
interest of a third person who was not impleaded as a party in the writ petition,
it is open to such aggrieved party who seek recall of the judgment.
Union Of India & Ors vs Ramesh Gandhi on 14 November, 2011
21.In Union of India's case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that non
disclosure of necessary facts would also amount to playing fraud on Court.
A.V. Papayya Sastry & Ors vs Government Of A.P. & Ors on 7 March, 2007
19.In A.V.Papayya Sastry's case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that
fraud vitiates all judicial acts whether in rem or in personam and can be
9/14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/09/2025 03:22:24 pm )
challenged in any Court, at any time, in appeal, revision, writ or even collateral
proceedings.
Sheik Mohammed Nizar vs Kamal Gupta on 6 July, 2017
18.In Sheik Mohammed Nizar's case, this Court following the ratio laid
down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Prestige Lights Limited Vs. State Bank
of India, reported in 2007 (4) CTC 727 SC, held that the exercise of jurisdiction
under Article 226 is discretionary and party approaching the Court must place
all facts before the Court without any reservation and when there has been
suppression of several facts, then the High Court is entitled to refuse equitable
remedy.
Indian Bank vs M/S Satyam Fibres (India} Pvt.Ltd on 9 August, 1996
22.In Indian Bank's case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that when
fraud is committed before the Court it is an abuse of process and any decree or
order obtained by committing fraud can be recalled in appropriate cases.
Nidhi Kaim & Anr vs State Of M P And Ors Etc on 13 February, 2017
23.In Nidhi Kaim's case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has laying down the
proposition that even the trivialist act of wrong doing, based on a singular act of
fraud could not be countenanced in the name of justice.
M/S Prestige Lights Ltd vs State Bank Of India on 20 August, 2007
18.In Sheik Mohammed Nizar's case, this Court following the ratio laid
down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Prestige Lights Limited Vs. State Bank
of India, reported in 2007 (4) CTC 727 SC, held that the exercise of jurisdiction
under Article 226 is discretionary and party approaching the Court must place
all facts before the Court without any reservation and when there has been
suppression of several facts, then the High Court is entitled to refuse equitable
remedy.
Lekshmipuram College Society vs The Account General Of Tamil Nadu on 5 September, 2023
The said proposition
was followed by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in Lekshmipuram
10/14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/09/2025 03:22:24 pm )
College Society's case.