https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173528 Suppression of a material fact by parties seeking discretionary relief justified refusal of special leave, because a litigant must disclose all relevant facts and cannot leave the Court to discover an earlier final order affecting the dispute. In relation to alienation of trust immovable property, the Court held that Section 36 of the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950 requires the trust's interest, benefit or protection to govern the process. On the facts, the High Court was justified in directing reconsideration of all bids and in preferring the course likely to secure the best price for the trust, and the Charity Commissioner was required to proceed accordingly. en-us Tue, 11 Dec 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 13 Jan 2018 10:54:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173528 Suppression of a material fact by parties seeking discretionary relief justified refusal of special leave, because a litigant must disclose all relevant facts and cannot leave the Court to discover an earlier final order affecting the dispute. In relation to alienation of trust immovable property, the Court held that Section 36 of the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950 requires the trust's interest, benefit or protection to govern the process. On the facts, the High Court was justified in directing reconsideration of all bids and in preferring the course likely to secure the best price for the trust, and the Charity Commissioner was required to proceed accordingly. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 11 Dec 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173528