Calcutta HC: Award May Be Set Aside if Tribunal Rewrites Contract or Ignores Key Clauses  ||  Delhi HC Suspends Kuldeep Singh Sengar’s Life Term, Holding Section 5(C) of POCSO Not Made Out  ||  Calcutta High Court: Arbitration Clause in an Expired Lease Cannot be Invoked For a Fresh Lease  ||  Delhi High Court: 120-Day Timeline under Section 132B Of Income Tax Act is Not Mandatory  ||  NCLAT Reaffirms That Borrower's Debt Acknowledgment Also Extends Limitation Period for Guarantors  ||  NCLAT: Oppression & Mismanagement Petition Cannot Be Filed Without Company Membership on Filing Date  ||  Supreme Court Quashes Rajasthan Village Renaming, Says Government Must Follow its Own Policy  ||  NCLAT: NCLT Can Order Forensic Audit on its Own, No Separate Application Required  ||  NCLAT Reiterates That IBC Cannot be Invoked as a Recovery Tool for Contractual Disputes  ||  Delhi HC: DRI or Central Revenues Control Lab Presence in Delhi Alone Does Not Confer Jurisdiction    

Tejo Ratna Kongara Vs. National Housing Bank and Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024:DHC:3053) - (High Court of Delhi) (16 Apr 2024)

Writ jurisdiction of the Court cannot be used by a party for collecting evidence and documents against another party

MANU/DE/2845/2024

Company

The present petition has been filed seeking directions against the Respondent no. 1/National Housing Bank ("NHB") to consider and decide upon the Petitioner's representation with further prayer for direction to Respondent no. 1 to call upon Respondent no. 2, i.e., India Bulls Housing Finance Limited ("IBHFL") to produce the responses and relevant documents, disclosing the actions taken by them in respect of the query dated 6th April, 2023 addressed by the Petitioner.

Writ jurisdiction of this Court cannot be used by a party for collecting evidence and documents against another party, against whom the petitioner has pending disputes. Writ jurisdiction is meant to safeguard the constitutional, legal and vested rights of a party. The powers vested with this Court under writ jurisdiction are large that are used by this Court to ensure that the constitutional and legal rights of parties are protected and secured.

The Court process, much less a writ jurisdiction, cannot be used as a fishing and roving enquiry against a party with whom the Petitioner has pending disputes, for the purposes of collecting evidence and documents to be used against such a party. The present petition filed by the petitioner is clearly a misuse and abuse of the process of the Court.

It is clear that, the Petitioner is trying to collect evidence and documents against IBREL, as is manifest from the representation dated 18th August, 2023 submitted by the petitioner to NHB. Neither any constitutional nor any legal right of the Petitioner is being violated or breached, for protection of which the present petition has been filed. This Court will not become a party in a fact finding and evidence collecting process in order to aid the Petitioner, which is the manifest purpose of filing the present petition. The present petition is clearly a misuse and abuse of the process of law. There is no merit is found in the present petition. Petition dismissed.

Tags : DOCUMENTS   PRODUCTION   DIRECTION  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved