https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275625 Writ relief under Article 226 is discretionary and depends on full and frank disclosure of all material facts. Where petitioners suppressed prior writ proceedings and a writ appeal involving the same controversy, the Court treated the non-disclosure as abuse of process and fraud on the Court. Because the later petitions relied on an earlier order obtained without disclosure of the complete litigation history, equitable relief was refused and the writ petitions were dismissed with costs. The governing principle is that suppression or lack of candour disentitles a litigant to discretionary writ relief. en-us Tue, 13 Oct 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 10 Oct 2018 12:58:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275625 Writ relief under Article 226 is discretionary and depends on full and frank disclosure of all material facts. Where petitioners suppressed prior writ proceedings and a writ appeal involving the same controversy, the Court treated the non-disclosure as abuse of process and fraud on the Court. Because the later petitions relied on an earlier order obtained without disclosure of the complete litigation history, equitable relief was refused and the writ petitions were dismissed with costs. The governing principle is that suppression or lack of candour disentitles a litigant to discretionary writ relief. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 13 Oct 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275625