https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456594 Writ relief was refused because the petitioners suppressed material facts about the prior eviction proceedings and the finality of those proceedings under the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971. The Court held that writ jurisdiction is equitable and requires a litigant to come with clean hands; where earlier show-cause, eviction, appeal and revision stages had already concluded, non-disclosure of those facts misled the Court and amounted to abuse of process. The petition therefore failed and no equitable relief was granted. en-us Wed, 30 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 02 Aug 2024 20:16:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456594 Writ relief was refused because the petitioners suppressed material facts about the prior eviction proceedings and the finality of those proceedings under the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971. The Court held that writ jurisdiction is equitable and requires a litigant to come with clean hands; where earlier show-cause, eviction, appeal and revision stages had already concluded, non-disclosure of those facts misled the Court and amounted to abuse of process. The petition therefore failed and no equitable relief was granted. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 30 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456594