As per the case facts, a fair price shop license granted to respondent No. 9 was cancelled by the Deputy Collector. This cancellation was later set aside by the High ... Court, which restored the license. The reason for the appeal to the Supreme Court was that respondent No. 9 had suppressed material facts and attempted to mislead the High Court, thereby obtaining an undue advantage. The question arose whether the High Court's order should be quashed due to fraud by suppression of material facts. Finally, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, quashed the High Court's order, and affirmed the initial cancellation of the fair price shop license, stating that suppression of material facts and misleading the court amounts to fraud, rendering the obtained order a nullity.