https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758364 Discretionary relief under Article 226 may be refused where the petitioner suppresses material facts, misstates the record, or acts in breach of contractual and financial obligations. On the facts recorded, the petitioner had routed sale proceeds through another bank contrary to the sanction conditions, which was treated as conduct showing lack of clean hands and abuse of process. The challenge to the Banking Ombudsman's jurisdiction was not accepted as a complete answer, but the petitioner still was not entitled to equitable relief. The writ petition was dismissed on equitable grounds and costs were imposed. en-us Tue, 13 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 13 Sep 2024 08:29:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758364 Discretionary relief under Article 226 may be refused where the petitioner suppresses material facts, misstates the record, or acts in breach of contractual and financial obligations. On the facts recorded, the petitioner had routed sale proceeds through another bank contrary to the sanction conditions, which was treated as conduct showing lack of clean hands and abuse of process. The challenge to the Banking Ombudsman's jurisdiction was not accepted as a complete answer, but the petitioner still was not entitled to equitable relief. The writ petition was dismissed on equitable grounds and costs were imposed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 13 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758364