https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285149 A plaint was held liable to rejection under Order VII Rule 11 CPC where the plaintiff's own pleadings showed participation in a transaction allegedly concealed in a relinquishment deed to avoid correct stamp duty consequences. The Court applied the principle of in pari delicto, holding that both parties were equally at fault and that a plaintiff seeking equitable or declaratory relief cannot rely on a wrong in which she was complicit. As courts do not assist a wrongdoer and leave the parties where they are found, the suit was treated as barred by law and could not be maintained. en-us Fri, 03 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 30 Dec 2019 14:25:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285149 A plaint was held liable to rejection under Order VII Rule 11 CPC where the plaintiff's own pleadings showed participation in a transaction allegedly concealed in a relinquishment deed to avoid correct stamp duty consequences. The Court applied the principle of in pari delicto, holding that both parties were equally at fault and that a plaintiff seeking equitable or declaratory relief cannot rely on a wrong in which she was complicit. As courts do not assist a wrongdoer and leave the parties where they are found, the suit was treated as barred by law and could not be maintained. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 03 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285149