Recourse to fraud, deflecting the course of judicial processes is an interference with the administration of justice and causes an abuse to the proceedings. This principle was asserted by the Delhi High Court in the case of Altico Capital India Limited vs. SARE Gurugram Private Limited [CS (COMM)1319/2018] by J. Mukta Gupta.
In the suit, the Altico Capital India Limited inter alia prayed for a decree of permanent injunction against the defendants restraining them from acting in breach of the Facility Agreement, with respect to changing its management, shareholding, restructuring both corporate and capital, and charter documents, without prior consent of the Plaintiff, directly or indirectly. The plaintiff also pleaded injunction against restraining the defendants from acting in breach of the following agreements with respect to changing its management, shareholding, restructuring both corporate and capital, and charter documents, without prior consent of the plaintiff, directly or indirectly.
In the decision reported as Chandra Shahi vs. Anil Kumar Verma, Supreme Court held: “The stream of administration of justice has to remain unpolluted so that purity of court’s atmosphere may give vitality to all the organs of the State. Polluters of judicial firmament are, therefore, required to be well taken care of to maintain the sublimity of court’s environment; so also to enable it to administer justice fairly and to the satisfaction of all concerned. Anyone who takes recourse to fraud, deflects the course of judicial proceedings; or if anything is done with oblique motive, the same interferes with the administration of justice. Such persons are required to be properly dealt with, not only to punish them for the wrong done, but also to deter others from indulging in similar acts which shake the faith of people in the system of administration of justice.”
In the instant case, the honorable court held, “As noted, the case of Altico in its pleadings especially qua SARE Cyprus is based on false and incorrect facts and finally Altico basis its case on a purported Board Resolution of SARE Cyprus which was a fabricated document. No cause of action has been shown in the plaint qua SARE Cyprus. There is concealment of material facts and documents and incorrect and false facts have been pleaded on oath. Without any agreement, guarantee or any board resolution passed by SARE Cyprus, Altico sought injunction and was granted injunction in the sweep of including it in all the defendants without SARE Cyprus being a privity to any of the contracts with Altico. Thus the present suit is a clear abuse of the process of the Court specially in so far as defendant SARE Cyprus.”
