Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2017 (11) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (11) TMI 1869 - HC - Indian LawsPrinciple of pari delicto - Partition, possession, cancellation of Relinquishment Deed - permanent injunction - alleged fraud - HELD THAT:- Upon a reading of the plaint and the documents filed, this Court finds that every time the plaintiff points one finger at the defendants, three fingers point back to the plaintiff. From the pleadings on record and arguments advanced, it is apparent that the plaintiff is equally at fault and was a part of the alleged fraud - this Court is of the view that the plaintiff on her own averments is a party to a fraud and had not disclosed true, correct and complete facts to the Registrar while getting the Relinquishment Deed registered. This Court is of the opinion that the principle of pari delicto is clearly applicable to the present case. In VINOD POPLI VERSUS RAGINI POPLI & ORS [2015 (4) TMI 1286 - DELHI HIGH COURT] this Court had culled out the principle of pari delicto holding that the phrase means "the principle that a plaintiff who has participated in wrongdoing may not recover damages resulting from the wrongdoing" and when parties to a legal controversy are in pari delicto neither can obtain any relief from the Court, since both are at equal fault or of equal guilt. This Court is of the view that the present plaint is barred by the principle of in pari delicto. Accordingly, present plaint and applications are rejected as barred by law under Order VII Rule 11 CPC - present suit and pending applications are dismissed.
|