Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 7 of 7 (0.34 seconds)Advocate General, State Of Bihar vs Madhya Pradesh Khair Industries Ltd on 5 March, 1980
3. The Commission in its aforesaid decision placed reliance on the
following Apex Court decision regarding vexatious and frivolous
petitions. The Supreme Court in Advocate General, Bihar vs. M.P.
Khair Industries(AIR 1980 SC 946) has termed "....filing of frivolous and
vexatious petitions as abuse of the RTI process. Some of such abuses
specifically mentioned by the Apex Court include initiating or carrying on
proceedings which are wanting in bona-fides or which are frivolous,
vexatious or oppressive. The Apex Court also observed that in such cases the
Court has extensive alternative powers to prevent an abuse of its process by
striking out or staying proceedings or by prohibiting taking up further
proceedings. ...."
Article 19 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Shail Sahni vs Sanjeev Kumar And Ors. on 5 February, 2014
6. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court also while deciding the case of Shail Sahni vs.
Sanjeev Kumar & Ors. [W.P. (C) 845/2014] has observed that:
Inst.Of Chartered Accountants Of India vs Shaunak H Sayta & Ors on 2 September, 2011
8. Considering the adverse impact of unmanageable amount of queries, the
Apex Court in a vital decision The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India
Vs. Shaunak H. Satya and Ors, A.I.R 2011 SC 3336) has categorically
cautioned thus:
Centrlal Board Of Sec.Education & Anr vs Aditya Bandopadhyay & Ors on 9 August, 2011
In the other landmark judgement in the case of Central Board of Secondary
Education & Anr. Vs. Aditya Bandopadhyay & Ors., the Apex Court held as
follows:
Ashok Kumar Pandey vs The State Of West Bengal on 18 November, 2003
4. The Apex Court had discussed the issue of wasteful vexatious litigation in great
detail in the case of Ashok Kumar Pandey vs. The State of West Bengal, (AIR
2003 SC 280 Para 11), where J. Pasayat had held:
1