SLP in CTR’s perjury application just do not exist. I must ignore the binding ratio of the Supreme Court in Food Corporation of India . I must hold that it is immaterial that CTR has consciously not pressed in these very Motions reliefs on the same ground in relation to the BPCL tender. CTR does not, therefore, ask for much: only that I should ignore, overlook and forget all this. I must, instead, CTR says, construe the Thane District Court’s orders ‘widely’ and ‘generously’, and in accordance with what CTR claims is their ‘spirit’. I must use these, or any other reasons that I might pluck out of thin air, never mind where justice lies, and I must do so because, after all, Sergi is a ‘serial offender’ and it has ‘brazenly flouted’ orders of various Courts. Above all, what I absolutely must do is strike out Sergi’s defence, for that is the proper ‘punishment’ for these ‘wrongs’ and this ‘contumacious conduct’ of so wicked and evil a ‘serial offender’. Of course, I should not trouble myself with concerns that any such order striking out Sergi’s defence will almost certainly torpedo its Counter-Claim, its revocation applications, its oppositions to the grant, the pending appeal from my own judgment of 23rd October 2015 and, in all likelihood, Direction No. 5 of the Supreme Court order of 25th May 2012, reinstated on 16th December 2015.
