{"id":264598,"date":"2022-03-28T12:00:50","date_gmt":"2022-03-28T06:30:50","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=264598"},"modified":"2022-05-18T11:54:10","modified_gmt":"2022-05-18T06:24:10","slug":"hc-spends-9-months-on-deciding-appeal-from-an-unappealable-adjournment-order-sc-imposes-rs-5-lakhs-exemplary-cost-on-litigant-for-wasting-precious-judicial-time","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/28\/hc-spends-9-months-on-deciding-appeal-from-an-unappealable-adjournment-order-sc-imposes-rs-5-lakhs-exemplary-cost-on-litigant-for-wasting-precious-judicial-time\/","title":{"rendered":"HC spends 9 months on deciding appeal from an ‘unappealable’ adjournment order. SC imposes Rs. 5 Lakhs exemplary cost on litigant for wasting ‘precious judicial time’"},"content":{"rendered":"

Supreme Court<\/strong>: In a trade mark infringement case where interlocutory injunction was sought during the pendency of the suit, the bench of L. Nageswara Rao and BR Gavai*, <\/strong>JJ, was faced with a strange situation where at first, an adjournment order of the single judge of Calcutta High Court was treated as a \u2018judgment\u2019 and appealed against and later on, in appeal, the division bench took in upon itself to dispose of the interlocutory\u00a0application\u00a0instead\u00a0of\u00a0relegating\u00a0it\u00a0to\u00a0the\u00a0court below\u00a0for\u00a0its\u00a0disposal because it did not want to prolong the litigation.<\/p>\n

Single Judge Bench\u2019s order <\/strong><\/span><\/h4>\n

The order was postponement of the question as to whether the respondent-plaintiff was entitled to grant of an ad-interim injunction or not, and that too, by merely three weeks.\u00a0 The order was only giving an opportunity to the appellants-defendants to file their affidavit-in-opposition within a period of two weeks. The order clarified that no prayer for extension of time shall be entertained.<\/p>\n

Was it a \u2018judgment\u2019? <\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/h4>\n

There was no adjudication with regard to the rights of the respondent-plaintiff to get an ad-interim injunction during the pendency of the suit.\u00a0 Though by postponement of the issue with regard to grant of ad-interim injunction, the order might have caused some inconvenience and may be, to some extent, prejudice to the respondent-plaintiff; the same could not be treated as a \u2018judgment\u2019 inasmuch as there was no conclusive finding as to whether the respondent-plaintiff was entitled for grant of ad-interim injunction or not.<\/p>\n

\n

\u201cAs such, the order passed by the learned Single Judge did not contain the traits and trappings of finality. If it is held otherwise, this will open a floodgate of appeals for parties who may even challenge the order of adjournment or grant of time to the other side to file affidavit-in-reply.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Hence, the said order cannot be construed to be a \u2018judgment\u2019 within the meaning of Clause 15 of Letters Patent and as such, the appeal to the Division Bench of the High Court was not tenable.<\/p>\n

Division Bench\u2019s order <\/strong><\/span><\/h4>\n

The Single Judge passed an order on 2nd\u00a0 April 2019 and the appeal to the Division Bench was filed immediately thereafter in the month of April, though the exact date of filing of appeal is not known. The judgment and order impugned herein was passed after a gap of about 8-9 months from the date of the order passed by the Single Judge.<\/p>\n

The perusal of the judgment and order impugned herein would clearly reveal that the counsel for the appellants-defendants had specifically submitted that the appeal was against an ad-interim order and therefore, the appellate court should not interfere by substituting its views but should instead direct a speedy hearing of the interim application of the respondent-plaintiff. The Division Bench of the High Court after recording the said submission, observed thus:<\/p>\n

\n

\u201cBefore entering into a discussion with regard to the merits of this case I say that all the facts and papers which were necessary for deciding the prima facie case of the parties were before us.\u00a0 On these facts and evidence we were in a position to assess their respective\u00a0\u00a0 prima\u00a0\u00a0 facie\u00a0\u00a0 case\u00a0\u00a0 and\u00a0\u00a0 the\u00a0\u00a0 balance\u00a0\u00a0 of convenience. In those circumstances we propose to dispose of the interlocutory\u00a0\u00a0 application\u00a0\u00a0 ourselves\u00a0\u00a0 instead of entering a prima facie finding and relegating it to the court below for its disposal. That would be unnecessary prolongation of the litigation and utter wastage of time.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

What was wrong with the order? <\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/h4>\n

The Supreme Court could not understand the anxiety on the part of the Division to itself dispose of\u00a0\u00a0 the interlocutory application instead of relegating it to the court below for its disposal when it itself took 8-9 months to decide the appeal.<\/p>\n

\n

\u201cIf the learned Judges of the Division Bench were so much concerned with the prolongation of litigation, they could have very well requested the learned Single Judge to decide the injunction application within a stipulated period. Instead of waiting for a period of 8-9 months, this could have been done by them at the very first instance when the appeal was listed. The hierarchy of the trial court and\u00a0 the appellate\u00a0 court\u00a0 exists\u00a0 so\u00a0 that the\u00a0 trial court exercises its discretion upon the settled principles of law.\u00a0 An appellate court, after the findings of the trial court are recorded, has an advantage of appreciating the view taken by the trial judge and examining the correctness or otherwise thereof within the limited area available. If the appellate court itself decides the matters required to be decided by the trial court, there would be no necessity to have the hierarchy of courts\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Hence, having waited for 8\u00ac9 months after the Single Judge had passed the order, all that ought to have been done by the Division Bench was to request the Single Judge to decide the application for ad-interim injunction, which in fact, the Single Judge had scheduled to do after three weeks from 2nd April 2019.\u00a0 It was not even necessary for the Division Bench to have waited till 24th December 2019 and taken the pains of deciding the application at first instance.\u00a0 It could have very well, in the month of April, 2019 itself, done the exercise of requesting the Single Judge to decide the application as scheduled.<\/p>\n

In any event, though the Division Bench of the High Court observes that for deciding the question with regard to grant of interim injunction, it has to put itself in a position as if it was moved to pass an interim order in the suit, it even fails to take into consideration the principles which a court is required to take into consideration while deciding such an application.<\/p>\n

Cost Imposed <\/strong><\/span><\/h4>\n

The Court observed that it is high time that this Court should take note of frivolous appeals being filed against unappealable orders wasting precious judicial time. As it is, the courts in India are already over-burdened with huge pendency. Such unwarranted proceedings at the behest of the parties who can afford to bear the expenses of such litigations, must be discouraged.<\/p>\n

Hence, the Court order the respondent-plaintiff to pay a token cost of Rs.5 lakhs to the Supreme Court Middle Income Group Legal Aid Society.<\/p>\n

[Shyam Sel and Power Ltd. v. Shyan Steel Industries Ltd., 2022 SCC OnLine SC 313<\/b><\/a>, decided on 14.03.2022]<\/p>\n

\n

*Judgment by: Justice BR Gavai<\/h4>\n
\n

For Appellants: Senior Advocate Mukul\u00a0Rohatgi<\/p>\n

For Respondents: Senior Advocate Neeraj Kishan Kaul<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Supreme Court: In a trade mark infringement case where interlocutory injunction was sought during the pendency of the suit, the bench of <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":121,"featured_media":264599,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,9],"tags":[8991,31954,12981,30320,13291,42599,48980],"class_list":["post-264598","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-supremecourt","tag-appeal","tag-interlocutory-order","tag-judgment","tag-order","tag-practice-and-procedure","tag-trade-marks","tag-unappealable-orders"],"yoast_head":"\nHC spends 9 months on deciding appeal from an 'unappealable' adjournment order. SC imposes Rs. 5 Lakhs exemplary cost on litigant for wasting 'precious judicial time' | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/28\/hc-spends-9-months-on-deciding-appeal-from-an-unappealable-adjournment-order-sc-imposes-rs-5-lakhs-exemplary-cost-on-litigant-for-wasting-precious-judicial-time\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"HC spends 9 months on deciding appeal from an 'unappealable' adjournment order. SC imposes Rs. 5 Lakhs exemplary cost on litigant for wasting 'precious judicial time'\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Supreme Court: In a trade mark infringement case where interlocutory injunction was sought during the pendency of the suit, the bench of\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/28\/hc-spends-9-months-on-deciding-appeal-from-an-unappealable-adjournment-order-sc-imposes-rs-5-lakhs-exemplary-cost-on-litigant-for-wasting-precious-judicial-time\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2022-03-28T06:30:50+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2022-05-18T06:24:10+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/HC-spends-9-months-on-deciding-appeal-from-an-unappealable-adjournment-order.-SC-imposes-Rs.-5-Lakhs-exemplary-cost-on-litigant-for-wasting-precious-judicial-time.png\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/png\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Prachi Bhardwaj\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Prachi Bhardwaj\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/28\/hc-spends-9-months-on-deciding-appeal-from-an-unappealable-adjournment-order-sc-imposes-rs-5-lakhs-exemplary-cost-on-litigant-for-wasting-precious-judicial-time\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/28\/hc-spends-9-months-on-deciding-appeal-from-an-unappealable-adjournment-order-sc-imposes-rs-5-lakhs-exemplary-cost-on-litigant-for-wasting-precious-judicial-time\/\",\"name\":\"HC spends 9 months on deciding appeal from an 'unappealable' adjournment order. SC imposes Rs. 5 Lakhs exemplary cost on litigant for wasting 'precious judicial time' | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/28\/hc-spends-9-months-on-deciding-appeal-from-an-unappealable-adjournment-order-sc-imposes-rs-5-lakhs-exemplary-cost-on-litigant-for-wasting-precious-judicial-time\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/28\/hc-spends-9-months-on-deciding-appeal-from-an-unappealable-adjournment-order-sc-imposes-rs-5-lakhs-exemplary-cost-on-litigant-for-wasting-precious-judicial-time\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/HC-spends-9-months-on-deciding-appeal-from-an-unappealable-adjournment-order.-SC-imposes-Rs.-5-Lakhs-exemplary-cost-on-litigant-for-wasting-precious-judicial-time.png\",\"datePublished\":\"2022-03-28T06:30:50+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2022-05-18T06:24:10+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/de579aff4bc6dd24b68d6d472ac92942\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/28\/hc-spends-9-months-on-deciding-appeal-from-an-unappealable-adjournment-order-sc-imposes-rs-5-lakhs-exemplary-cost-on-litigant-for-wasting-precious-judicial-time\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/28\/hc-spends-9-months-on-deciding-appeal-from-an-unappealable-adjournment-order-sc-imposes-rs-5-lakhs-exemplary-cost-on-litigant-for-wasting-precious-judicial-time\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/28\/hc-spends-9-months-on-deciding-appeal-from-an-unappealable-adjournment-order-sc-imposes-rs-5-lakhs-exemplary-cost-on-litigant-for-wasting-precious-judicial-time\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/HC-spends-9-months-on-deciding-appeal-from-an-unappealable-adjournment-order.-SC-imposes-Rs.-5-Lakhs-exemplary-cost-on-litigant-for-wasting-precious-judicial-time.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/HC-spends-9-months-on-deciding-appeal-from-an-unappealable-adjournment-order.-SC-imposes-Rs.-5-Lakhs-exemplary-cost-on-litigant-for-wasting-precious-judicial-time.png\",\"width\":1330,\"height\":887},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/28\/hc-spends-9-months-on-deciding-appeal-from-an-unappealable-adjournment-order-sc-imposes-rs-5-lakhs-exemplary-cost-on-litigant-for-wasting-precious-judicial-time\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"HC spends 9 months on deciding appeal from an ‘unappealable’ adjournment order. SC imposes Rs. 5 Lakhs exemplary cost on litigant for wasting ‘precious judicial time’\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/de579aff4bc6dd24b68d6d472ac92942\",\"name\":\"Prachi Bhardwaj\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Prachi-Image2-150x150.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Prachi-Image2-150x150.png\",\"caption\":\"Prachi Bhardwaj\"},\"description\":\"Senior Associate Editor\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_3\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"HC spends 9 months on deciding appeal from an 'unappealable' adjournment order. SC imposes Rs. 5 Lakhs exemplary cost on litigant for wasting 'precious judicial time' | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/28\/hc-spends-9-months-on-deciding-appeal-from-an-unappealable-adjournment-order-sc-imposes-rs-5-lakhs-exemplary-cost-on-litigant-for-wasting-precious-judicial-time\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"HC spends 9 months on deciding appeal from an 'unappealable' adjournment order. SC imposes Rs. 5 Lakhs exemplary cost on litigant for wasting 'precious judicial time'","og_description":"Supreme Court: In a trade mark infringement case where interlocutory injunction was sought during the pendency of the suit, the bench of","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/28\/hc-spends-9-months-on-deciding-appeal-from-an-unappealable-adjournment-order-sc-imposes-rs-5-lakhs-exemplary-cost-on-litigant-for-wasting-precious-judicial-time\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2022-03-28T06:30:50+00:00","article_modified_time":"2022-05-18T06:24:10+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/HC-spends-9-months-on-deciding-appeal-from-an-unappealable-adjournment-order.-SC-imposes-Rs.-5-Lakhs-exemplary-cost-on-litigant-for-wasting-precious-judicial-time.png","type":"image\/png"}],"author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Prachi Bhardwaj","Est. reading time":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/28\/hc-spends-9-months-on-deciding-appeal-from-an-unappealable-adjournment-order-sc-imposes-rs-5-lakhs-exemplary-cost-on-litigant-for-wasting-precious-judicial-time\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/28\/hc-spends-9-months-on-deciding-appeal-from-an-unappealable-adjournment-order-sc-imposes-rs-5-lakhs-exemplary-cost-on-litigant-for-wasting-precious-judicial-time\/","name":"HC spends 9 months on deciding appeal from an 'unappealable' adjournment order. SC imposes Rs. 5 Lakhs exemplary cost on litigant for wasting 'precious judicial time' | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/28\/hc-spends-9-months-on-deciding-appeal-from-an-unappealable-adjournment-order-sc-imposes-rs-5-lakhs-exemplary-cost-on-litigant-for-wasting-precious-judicial-time\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/28\/hc-spends-9-months-on-deciding-appeal-from-an-unappealable-adjournment-order-sc-imposes-rs-5-lakhs-exemplary-cost-on-litigant-for-wasting-precious-judicial-time\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/HC-spends-9-months-on-deciding-appeal-from-an-unappealable-adjournment-order.-SC-imposes-Rs.-5-Lakhs-exemplary-cost-on-litigant-for-wasting-precious-judicial-time.png","datePublished":"2022-03-28T06:30:50+00:00","dateModified":"2022-05-18T06:24:10+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/de579aff4bc6dd24b68d6d472ac92942"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/28\/hc-spends-9-months-on-deciding-appeal-from-an-unappealable-adjournment-order-sc-imposes-rs-5-lakhs-exemplary-cost-on-litigant-for-wasting-precious-judicial-time\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/28\/hc-spends-9-months-on-deciding-appeal-from-an-unappealable-adjournment-order-sc-imposes-rs-5-lakhs-exemplary-cost-on-litigant-for-wasting-precious-judicial-time\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/28\/hc-spends-9-months-on-deciding-appeal-from-an-unappealable-adjournment-order-sc-imposes-rs-5-lakhs-exemplary-cost-on-litigant-for-wasting-precious-judicial-time\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/HC-spends-9-months-on-deciding-appeal-from-an-unappealable-adjournment-order.-SC-imposes-Rs.-5-Lakhs-exemplary-cost-on-litigant-for-wasting-precious-judicial-time.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/HC-spends-9-months-on-deciding-appeal-from-an-unappealable-adjournment-order.-SC-imposes-Rs.-5-Lakhs-exemplary-cost-on-litigant-for-wasting-precious-judicial-time.png","width":1330,"height":887},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/28\/hc-spends-9-months-on-deciding-appeal-from-an-unappealable-adjournment-order-sc-imposes-rs-5-lakhs-exemplary-cost-on-litigant-for-wasting-precious-judicial-time\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"HC spends 9 months on deciding appeal from an ‘unappealable’ adjournment order. SC imposes Rs. 5 Lakhs exemplary cost on litigant for wasting ‘precious judicial time’"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/de579aff4bc6dd24b68d6d472ac92942","name":"Prachi Bhardwaj","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Prachi-Image2-150x150.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Prachi-Image2-150x150.png","caption":"Prachi Bhardwaj"},"description":"Senior Associate Editor","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_3\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/HC-spends-9-months-on-deciding-appeal-from-an-unappealable-adjournment-order.-SC-imposes-Rs.-5-Lakhs-exemplary-cost-on-litigant-for-wasting-precious-judicial-time.png","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":269519,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/07\/04\/revisiting-and-demystifying-the-decades-old-interlocutory-order-criminal-revision-conundrum\/","url_meta":{"origin":264598,"position":0},"title":"Revisiting and Demystifying the Decades Old Interlocutory Order \u2014 Criminal Revision Conundrum","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"July 4, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"by Shrikrishna Dagliya\u2020","rel":"","context":"In "Op Eds"","block_context":{"text":"Op Eds","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/op-ed\/legal-analysis\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Op Ed","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/op_ed_by_Shrikrishna_Dagliya.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/op_ed_by_Shrikrishna_Dagliya.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/op_ed_by_Shrikrishna_Dagliya.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/op_ed_by_Shrikrishna_Dagliya.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/op_ed_by_Shrikrishna_Dagliya.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":239106,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/11\/14\/interlocutory-orders-stay-of-trial-proceedings-and-inherent-powers-a-discussion-on-asian-resurfacing-of-road-agency-p-ltd-v-cbi\/","url_meta":{"origin":264598,"position":1},"title":"Interlocutory Orders, Stay of Trial Proceedings and Inherent Powers: A discussion on \u2018Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency (P) \u00a0Ltd. v. CBI\u2019","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"November 14, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"by Abhinav Sharma & Prajwal Shukla*","rel":"","context":"In "Op Eds"","block_context":{"text":"Op Eds","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/op-ed\/legal-analysis\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/sc-qoute-3.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/sc-qoute-3.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/sc-qoute-3.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/sc-qoute-3.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/sc-qoute-3.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":256723,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/11\/04\/no-appeals-will-lie-against-ad-interim-orders-in-a-pending-case\/","url_meta":{"origin":264598,"position":2},"title":"Ker HC | No appeals will lie against ad interim orders in a pending case","author":"Editor","date":"November 4, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Kerala High Court: P.B. Suresh Kumar and C.S. Sudha, JJ., held that ad interim orders cannot be impugned in an appeal under Section 5(i) of the Act. The Bench stated, \u201cIf appeals against such orders are entertained, the appellate court would be usurping the original jurisdiction of the Court under\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":214192,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/05\/01\/sl-coa-order-finally-disposing-dispute-is-a-final-order-but-an-order-that-allows-action-to-go-on-is-an-interlocutory-order\/","url_meta":{"origin":264598,"position":3},"title":"SL CoA | Order finally disposing dispute is a final order, but an order that allows action to go on is an interlocutory order","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"May 1, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Court of Appeal for the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka: The Bench of M.M.A. Gaffoor, J. dismissed an appeal against an order rejecting an intervention application in a suit for partition, holding that the same was statutorily barred and because the impugned order was merely an interlocutory order. Appellant\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/Supreme-Court-of-Sri-Lanka.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/Supreme-Court-of-Sri-Lanka.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/Supreme-Court-of-Sri-Lanka.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/Supreme-Court-of-Sri-Lanka.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/Supreme-Court-of-Sri-Lanka.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":282356,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/01\/24\/interlocutory-order-in-one-case-cannot-be-treated-as-precedent-for-cancellation-of-bail-of-accused-in-other-cases-supreme-court-legal-resear\/","url_meta":{"origin":264598,"position":4},"title":"Interlocutory order in one case cannot be treated as precedent for cancellation of bail of accused in other cases: Supreme Court","author":"Editor","date":"January 24, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court has ordered that the Rajasthan High Court's impugned order being interlocutory in nature, shall not be treated as precedent for cancellation of bail granted to the petitioner in other cases, and the question of law was kept open to be decided in an appropriate case.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/MicrosoftTeams-image-181.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":282480,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/01\/26\/repudiated-appeal-of-google-llc-deposit-10-penalty-quantified-order-of-cci-for-abuse-of-dominance-in-relation-to-android-eco-system-legal-news-legal-research-update\/","url_meta":{"origin":264598,"position":5},"title":"‘Findings not contrary to the weight of record\u2019; Supreme Court affirms NCLAT’s order refusing to stay CCI\u2019s Rs 1,338 crore penalty on Google LLC for anti-competitive practices","author":"Editor","date":"January 26, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The Supreme Court had reservation to express its opinion on the merits of the case which would otherwise affect the proceedings pending before NCLAT and stated that the findings of the CCI at the interlocutory stage was neither without jurisdiction nor suffered from any error which would necessitate interference in\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/MicrosoftTeams-image-202.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/264598","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/121"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=264598"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/264598\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/264599"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=264598"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=264598"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=264598"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}