Section 10 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, states that “Personal bars to relief” which includes when a person comes into court with unclean hands or has acted in fraud or misrepresentation. This provision applies across all Indian states.

As a law firm specializing in Non Resident Indian (NRI) affairs, we acknowledge that the issue of personal bars to relief under Section 10 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 is of utmost importance. This provision signifies that an individual’s request for redressal can be barred if he or she has acted fraudulently or with misrepresentation. The applicability of this mandate extends across all states in India.

Section 10 precludes any decree from being granted to a party who has unclean hands and would be unconscionable to enforce against such individuals. Therefore, it serves as a potent defense against parties who seek to gain undue advantage by deception or concealment.

To elucidate on this matter further, let us consider some case laws:

1. In Ashok Leyland Limited v GN Venkatesh Babu & Anr., the defendants had violated the confidentiality agreement and shared confidential information obtained during their employment with another company. Consequently, it was held that they were disentitled from seeking an injunction in their favor.

2. In Karamyogi Shankar Shukla v Narendra Kumar Tiwari & Ors., the petitioner failed to disclose vital facts regarding his ownership over disputed property and was consequently denied relief.

3. In Kidderpore Tea Co Ltd vs Sirajuddin Bibi & Others, it was established that if one person makes false representations which induce another into giving away property belonging to them without adequate consideration then remedy cannot be given in equity as provided for rule based on ‘unclean hands’.

4. In Maharashtra Housing Development Authority v Soma Vijay Kumar Jain & others where there is prayer made out of obligation but not with clean hand intrinsic fraud is proved so no interim relief can be granted

These cases demonstrate how personal bars are applied judiciously by courts when faced with situations involving fraudulent conduct or misrepresentation by either party.

Furthermore, NRI’s could be particularly susceptible to personal bars to relief, especially in cases where they may not be physically present in India and are unable to scrutinize the actions of their legal representatives or agents. Therefore, it is imperative that NRIs engage credible lawyers who can provide them with sound advice and representation during proceedings.

In conclusion, Section 10 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 ensures that justice is served by precluding fraudulent and deceitful conduct. It serves as a potent tool for courts to deny adversaries from seeking relief when they have acted unconscionably against established legal precedents. Law firms must educate clients on this provision so that all individuals understand the importance of acting with honesty and integrity when pursuing remedies through legal means.