https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271877 Full and candid disclosure is mandatory in writ jurisdiction, and suppression of material facts can justify of discretionary relief. The petition challenging a Section 14 SARFAESI order was vulnerable because the secured asset had already been auctioned, possession had been handed to the auction purchaser, and those third-party rights were not disclosed. Once the order had been implemented and the auction process concluded, the petitioner could not seek restoration of the status quo ante without independently challenging the auction proceedings. The petition was therefore liable to rejection for suppression of material facts and for seeking relief against an already completed action. en-us Mon, 05 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 20 Feb 2016 09:54:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271877 Full and candid disclosure is mandatory in writ jurisdiction, and suppression of material facts can justify of discretionary relief. The petition challenging a Section 14 SARFAESI order was vulnerable because the secured asset had already been auctioned, possession had been handed to the auction purchaser, and those third-party rights were not disclosed. Once the order had been implemented and the auction process concluded, the petitioner could not seek restoration of the status quo ante without independently challenging the auction proceedings. The petition was therefore liable to rejection for suppression of material facts and for seeking relief against an already completed action. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 05 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271877