Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran ... vs Chander Kumar Kak on 13 October, 2023

Bench: Hrishikesh Roy, Sanjay Karol

     ITEM NO.52                            COURT NO.9                SECTION XVII-A

                                 S U P R E M E C O U R T O F     I N D I A
                                         RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

                         SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No(s). 21599/2022

     (Arising out of impugned judgment and order dated 12-07-2021 in MA
     No. 263/2020 in R.P. No. 1103/2010 passed by the National Consumers
     Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi)

     HARYANA SHEHRI VIKAS PRADHIKARAN (HSVP) & ANR.                   Petitioner(s)

                                                  VERSUS

     CHANDER KUMAR KAK                                                Respondent(s)

(IA No. 103356/2022 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING) WITH SLP(C) No. 11775/2022 (XVII-A) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R.[FOR DISPOSAL]) SLP(C) No. 13838/2022 (XVII-A) (FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT ON IA 110913/2022 IA No. 110913/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT) SLP(C) No. 13136/2022 (XVII-A) Date : 13-10-2023 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HRISHIKESH ROY HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KAROL For Petitioner(s) Mr. Lokesh Sinhal, Sr. A.A.G. Ms. Noopur Singhal, Adv.

Mr. Akshay Amritanshu, AOR Mr. Samyak Jain, Adv.

Mr. Nikunj Gupta, Adv.

Ms. Himanshi Shakya, Adv.

For Respondent(s) Mr. Suryanarayana Singh, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Shreeyash Uday Lalit, Adv.

Mrs. Swati Bhushan Sharma, Adv. Mr. Naveen Sharma, AOR Signature Not Verified Mrs. Swati Bhusan Sharma, Adv.

NITIN TALREJA Date: 2023.10.16 Mr. S. K. Shrama, Adv.

09:56:19 IST Reason: Mr. Anurag Parashar, Adv.

Mr. Hasan Abbas, Adv.

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following 1  O R D E R Mr. Lokesh Sinhal, learned Sr. AAG refers to judgment dated 26.07.2023 in the SLP (Civil) No. 5263 of 2023 (M/s. Universal Sompo General Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Suresh Chand Jain & Anr.) (neutral citation - 2023 INSC 649) to say that the petitioner instead of pressing these Special Leave Petitions will avail alternate remedy either by way of writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution, or by invoking the supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution, as referred to in paragraph 38 of the cited judgment. Paragraph 38 of the said judgment reads as under:

“38. In the aforesaid view of the matter, we have reached to the conclusion that we should not adjudicate this petition on merits. We must ask the petitioner herein to first go before the jurisdictional High Court either by way of a writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution or by invoking the supervisory jurisdiction of the jurisdictional High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution. Of course, after the High Court adjudicates and passes a final order, it is always open for either of the parties to thereafter come before this Court by filing special leave petition, seeking leave to appeal under Article 136 of the Constitution.“ The respondents are represented by Mr. Suryanarayana Singh, learned senior counsel and Mr. Shreeyash Uday Lalit, learned counsel.

Noting the above submissions of the petitioner’s counsel, the Special Leave Petitions stand dismissed, as not pressed.

(NITIN TALREJA) (KAMLESH RAWAT) COURT MASTER (SH) ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 2