Non-disclosure of prior High Court refusal vitiates travel permission granted without proper judicial application of mind.

An order permitting a respondent to travel abroad was set aside because the application before the trial court concealed that the High Court had already refused the same request in the same matter. The omission was treated as deliberate and material, and the trial court granted permission without ascertaining the earlier High Court proceedings, despite reference to that order in the application. The court held that this reflected non-application of mind and disregard of judicial hierarchy, so the permission to travel abroad could not stand.

---

---

Issues: Whether the order granting permission to travel abroad should be set aside for concealment of the earlier refusal by the High Court and for lack of application of mind by the trial court.

Analysis: The application before the trial court did not disclose that the High Court had earlier declined the same respondent's request to travel abroad in the very same matter. The omission was treated as deliberate and material. The trial court also granted permission without ascertaining the outcome of the earlier High Court proceedings, despite the respondent having referred to the High Court order in the application. In these circumstances, the grant of permission was found to suffer from non-application of mind and to disregard the judicial hierarchy.

Conclusion: The impugned order granting permission to travel abroad was set aside.

---