https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460160 In repeated litigation concerning the same property, the High Court upheld dismissal of a suit as an abuse of process under the court's inherent powers because the pleadings and conduct showed an attempt to prevent the decree-holders from enjoying the fruits of an earlier decree rather than seek bona fide adjudication of title. It also affirmed rejection of additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 because the documents were neither necessary nor satisfactorily explained as unavailable earlier. The Court further sustained dismissal of a successive execution objection under Order 21 Rule 97, since it repeated issues already finally decided without new material. The impugned orders were maintained and possession was directed to be delivered to the decree-holders. en-us Mon, 18 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 14 Jan 2025 14:20:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460160 In repeated litigation concerning the same property, the High Court upheld dismissal of a suit as an abuse of process under the court's inherent powers because the pleadings and conduct showed an attempt to prevent the decree-holders from enjoying the fruits of an earlier decree rather than seek bona fide adjudication of title. It also affirmed rejection of additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 because the documents were neither necessary nor satisfactorily explained as unavailable earlier. The Court further sustained dismissal of a successive execution objection under Order 21 Rule 97, since it repeated issues already finally decided without new material. The impugned orders were maintained and possession was directed to be delivered to the decree-holders. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 18 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460160