Srinagar: The High Court of J&K and Ladakh has imposed costs to the tune of Rs 20,000 on a Jammu-based contracting company for filing two petitions with same cause but “suppressing the material facts” with a view to “mislead the court” so as to get a favourable order.
The court dismissed the twin petitions, both urging similar grounds and prayers filed by M/s S K Project through its Proprietor Tariq Hussain Sheikh of Gurrekrah, Gandoh, District Doda, Jammu.
Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal observed that the petitioner(s) instead of availing other remedies available under law has chosen to file the instant petition by way of 2nd round of litigation urging similar grounds and facts and that too by suppressing the material facts, and with a view to mislead this court to get a favourable order.
This court held that the petitioner has abused the process of court by filing the instant petition and “found it a fit case, where the exemplary costs can be imposed with a view to deter such unscrupulous litigants to abuse the process of court”.
Accordingly, the court imposed costs to the tune of Rs. 20,000 on the petitioner “for abusing the process of court in filing the instant petitions by suppressing the material facts which amount shall be paid by the petitioners in the Advocates’ Welfare Fund within a period of two weeks from today”.
M/s S A Project had filed the petitions against UT of J&K through its Commissioner/Secretary Public Works Department (R&B), its Chief Engineer; Chief Engineer, PWD (R&B); Mughal Road Project Bafliaz Shopian Executive Engineer and the Mumbai-based Hindustan Construction Co. (HCC) Ltd. Head Office, Hincon House, Lal Bahadur Shastri Marg Vikhorli (West) Mumbai
It prayed release the payment of an amount of Rs 14,27,966 and Rs 9,62,350 in his favour with respect to execution of work on Uri Hydro Electric Project II along with interest @ 24% per annum. It claimed that the payment has been illegally withheld by the respondents despite having successfully completed the contract works.
Interestingly in another petition it sought release of the same withheld amounts “for wrongful withholding by Mumbai-based HCC Co. Ltd despite completion of the sub contract allotted to it by HCC.
Justice Nargal held that the petitioner has misled the court and that it is the duty of every party before the court to lay all relevant facts necessary for the fair adjudication of the matter.
“Failure to do so strikes at the very root of justice, because the court’s ability to dispense fair and equitable relief depends on an accurate and complete factual matrix. When material facts are deliberately withheld or concealed, the court is misled and the adversarial process is compromised. This not only results in injustice but also erodes public confidence in the legal system,” the bench remarked.
The judicial system relies on the good faith of parties, and any deviation in the form of suppression of material facts invites stringent consequences, including dismissal of the petition and imposition of costs, said the bench, adding “this approach ensures that justice is administered in an environment of trust and fairness, safeguarding the dignity and sanctity of the judicial process”.
It recorded that the petitioner, instead of availing other remedies available under law, has chosen to file the instant petition by way of 2nd round of litigation, urging similar grounds and facts and that too by suppressing the material facts and with a view to misleading this Court to get a favourable order.
