https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308127 A party seeking Article 226 relief must make full disclosure of prior litigation and all material facts; suppression of earlier civil proceedings amounts to abuse of process and disentitles the party to discretionary writ relief. Applying that principle, the appellants were non-suited because they had withheld the earlier suit and appeal concerning the same dispute. The claim that 8 guntas remained outside acquisition also failed because the acquisition record showed the entire extent in Survey No. 13, including the kharab-B portion, was notified, and the belated challenge was inconsistent with the prior final findings. The refusal to interfere was therefore left undisturbed. en-us Wed, 08 Dec 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 31 May 2023 20:34:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308127 A party seeking Article 226 relief must make full disclosure of prior litigation and all material facts; suppression of earlier civil proceedings amounts to abuse of process and disentitles the party to discretionary writ relief. Applying that principle, the appellants were non-suited because they had withheld the earlier suit and appeal concerning the same dispute. The claim that 8 guntas remained outside acquisition also failed because the acquisition record showed the entire extent in Survey No. 13, including the kharab-B portion, was notified, and the belated challenge was inconsistent with the prior final findings. The refusal to interfere was therefore left undisturbed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 08 Dec 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308127