https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311351 Repeated attempts to restrain the petitioner's suits, based on substantially the same grounds already rejected by the Delhi High Court and earlier proceedings before the same court, were treated as abuse of process when the respondents suppressed those adverse orders and obtained fresh interim relief. The court applied the settled meaning of criminal contempt under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, namely conduct interfering with the due course of judicial proceedings or the administration of justice, and held that concealment of material facts and repeated litigation on the same issue showed lack of bona fides. It further recognised inherent power to prevent repetition of such abuse and restrained further similar proceedings without prior leave. The respondents, except three given the benefit of doubt, were held guilty of criminal contempt. en-us Tue, 27 Sep 1977 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 21 Dec 2023 12:20:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311351 Repeated attempts to restrain the petitioner's suits, based on substantially the same grounds already rejected by the Delhi High Court and earlier proceedings before the same court, were treated as abuse of process when the respondents suppressed those adverse orders and obtained fresh interim relief. The court applied the settled meaning of criminal contempt under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, namely conduct interfering with the due course of judicial proceedings or the administration of justice, and held that concealment of material facts and repeated litigation on the same issue showed lack of bona fides. It further recognised inherent power to prevent repetition of such abuse and restrained further similar proceedings without prior leave. The respondents, except three given the benefit of doubt, were held guilty of criminal contempt. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 27 Sep 1977 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311351