Excelsior Correspondent
JAMMU, Aug 1: In a strong message against dishonest litigation, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has dismissed a writ petition filed by a 72-year old Delhi resident originally from Srinagar for concealing material facts and misleading the court regarding a residential plot and even imposed cost of Rs 50,000 for abuse of the legal process.
The judgment was delivered by Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal in a petition filed by Sunil Kumar Trakroo, who had approached the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a declaration that he held a valid and subsisting allotment of plot in the Rawalpora Housing Colony (now Sanat Nagar) in Srinagar, which he claimed devolved upon him from his predecessor-in-interest Ghulam Nabi Sathu.
The petitioner prayed for cancellation of the auction in favour of respondent (Feroz Ahmad Mir), quashing of the building permission order, restraining the authorities from interfering with his possession and for transfer of the plot to his name.
While arguing that his allotment continued to be valid, Trakroo simultaneously challenged the Housing Board’s 2022 e-auction under which the same plot had been allotted to respondent Feroz Ahmad Mir.
However, during the hearing, the Senior Additional Advocate General Mohsin Qadri submitted a certified copy of a previously filed civil suit by the petitioner on the same cause of action. This civil suit was filed on August 25, 2022, prior to the writ petition, and was subsequently dismissed on March 20, 2023 by the Court of Forest Magistrate, Srinagar.
The petitioner did not disclose this fact in the High Court and instead proceeded to file the writ petition on November 11, 2022, seeking identical reliefs. Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal found this concealment to be “wilful and deliberate” especially since the same advocate had appeared in both the civil suit and the writ petition.
“A person invoking the writ jurisdiction must approach the court with clean hands. Suppression of material facts disentitles a petitioner from any equitable or discretionary relief”, the High Court said while citing several landmark judgments of the Supreme Court. Justice Nargal quoted the Apex Court’s views that frivolous litigation and attempts to mislead courts must be checked with strict judicial action.
The High Court observed that respondent, who had lawfully secured the plot through public auction, was prevented from carrying out construction due to interim orders obtained by the petitioner. Despite having paid full consideration and securing building permission, he was entangled in unnecessary litigation leading to financial loss and mental agony.
“The petitioner’s conduct has caused injury to the respondent and amounts to nothing short of fraudulent misuse of the judicial process,” the High Court noted and to discourage abuse of judicial forums imposed exemplary cost of Rs 50,000 to be paid by the petitioner to the respondent within two weeks. “This amount is to be deposited in the Registry of the High Court and subsequently released in favour of the respondent”, the read the judgment.
Follow our WhatsApp channel
