Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

Assets Care And Reconstruction ... vs The State Of Maharashtra on 16 October, 2023

Bench: B.R. Gavai, Prashant Kumar Mishra

                                             IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
                                              CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION


                         CIVIL APPEAL      NO(S).               @ SLP(C) No.9913/2022

                         ASSETS CARE AND RECONSTRUCTION
                         ENTERPRISES LIMITED                                   APPELLANT(S)

                                                       VERSUS

                         THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.                       RESPONDENT(S)


                                                    O R D E R

1. Leave granted.

2. The appellant has challenged the order of the High Court dated 25.01.2022, which reads thus:-

“1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

Arguable questions are made out.

2. Admit.

3. As the petitioner is having alternate remedy, we are refraining ourselves from granting interim relief.”

3. We are surprised to read the impugned order.

4. If the High Court has found that the matter was worth admitting then there was no question of non-considering the issue with regard to grant or refusal of interim relief, on the ground that there is an alternate remedy.

5. When the High Court finds that there is merit in the matter and admits it, then it was also bound to consider as to whether the interim relief should have been granted or not.

6. Non-granting of interim relief on the ground that there is an alternate remedy available is totally contradictory to the earlier part of the order admitting the matter.

7. Non-consideration of the question of grant or refusal of Digitally signed by Narendra Prasad Date: 2023.10.18 10:13:07 IST interim relief, in our considered view, would be a failure Reason: to exercise the jurisdiction vested in the High Court.

8. We, therefore, set aside the impugned order and remit the matter back to the High Court. The High Court would consider whether the interim relief needs to be granted or not.

9. The appeal is allowed, to the extent indicated above.

10. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

..............................J ( B.R. GAVAI ) ..............................J ( PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA ) NEW DELHI;

OCTOBER 16, 2023




                              2
ITEM NO.54                 COURT NO.4                SECTION IX

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

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C)     No(s).    9913/2022

(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 25-01-2022 in WP No. 10695/2019 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay at Aurangabad) ASSETS CARE AND RECONSTRUCTION ENTERPRISES LIMITED PETITIONER(S) VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) Date : 16-10-2023 This petition was called on for hearing today.

CORAM :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.R. GAVAI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Amarjit Singh Bedi, AOR Mr. R P Agrawal, Adv.

Ms. Manisha Agrawal, Adv. Ms. Riya Seth, Adv.

Mr. Varun Chandiok, Adv.

For Respondent(s) Mr. Shrirang B. Varma, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR Mr. Sourav Singh, Adv.

Mr. Aditya Krishna, Adv.

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R

1. Leave granted.

2. The appeal is allowed, in terms of the signed order.

(NARENDRA PRASAD) (ANJU KAPOOR) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH) (Signed order is placed on the file) 3