Exclusive HOLI Discounts!
Get Courses and Combos at Upto 50% OFF!
Upgrad
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

amit8 (abcdef)     27 October 2014

Supreme court judgement , unclean hands

Is the below judgement vaild for wife who came to court with unclean hands to get maintenance in dv act case ?

Wife said she is not working , but later agreed that she is working , so can be she still be given maintenance ?

can we appela in higher courts based on the below judgement ?

 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Civil Appeal No. 5239 of 2002

Decided On: 03.12.2009

Appellants: Dalip Singh
Vs.
Respondent: State of U.P. and Ors.

Hon’ble Judges:G.S. Singhvi and Asok Kumar Ganguly, JJ.

Disposition:Appeal dismissed

ORDER
1. For many centuries, Indian society cherished two basic values of life i.e.,
‘Satya’ (truth) and ‘Ahimsa’ (non-violence). Mahavir, Gautam Buddha and Mahatma Gandhi guided
the people to ingrain these values in their daily life. Truth constituted an integral Dart of
justice delivery system which was in vogue in pre-independence era and the people used to feel proud
to tell truth in the courts irrespective of the consequences. However, post-independence period has seen
drastic changes in our value system.

The materialism has over-shadowed the old ethos and the quest for personal gain has become so intense that
those involved in litigation do no hesitate to take shelter of falsehood, misrepresentation and suppression of facts
in the court proceedings. In last 40 years, a new creed of litigants has cropped up.
Those who belong to this creed do not have any respect for truth.
They shamelessly resort to falsehood and unethical means for achieving their goals.


In order to meet the challenge posed by this new creed of litigants, the courts have,
from time to time, evolved new rules and it is now well established that a litigant,
who attempts to pollute the stream of justice or who touches the pure fountain of justice with tainted hands,
is not entitled to any relief, interim or final.”
 



Learning

 1 Replies

LoneFighter (IT)     28 October 2014

1. For many centuries, Indian society cherished two basic values of life i.e.,
‘Satya’ (truth) and ‘Ahimsa’ (non-violence). Mahavir, Gautam Buddha and Mahatma Gandhi guided
the people to ingrain these values in their daily life. Truth constituted an integral Dart of
justice delivery system which was in vogue in pre-independence era and the people used to feel proud
to tell truth in the courts irrespective of the consequences. However, post-independence period has seen
drastic changes in our value system.

The materialism has over-shadowed the old ethos and the quest for personal gain has become so intense that
those involved in litigation do no hesitate to take shelter of falsehood, misrepresentation and suppression of facts
in the court proceedings. In last 40 years, a new creed of litigants has cropped up.
Those who belong to this creed do not have any respect for truth.
They shamelessly resort to falsehood and unethical means for achieving their goals.


In order to meet the challenge posed by this new creed of litigants, the courts have,
from time to time, evolved new rules and it is now well established that a litigant,
who attempts to pollute the stream of justice or who touches the pure fountain of justice with tainted hands,
is not entitled to any relief, interim or final.”

 

 

I must say, these sentences remind me of Siddartha by Herman Hesse. 

 

Please attach the entire judgement, might be useful for others. 


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register