Mirasab Yakubsab Mujawar vs. Saifan Hasan Ali Mujawar
AI Summary
The Supreme Court has dismissed a Special Leave Petition challenging a High Court order, declining to interfere with the lower court's decision. However, the petitioners have been granted the liberty to pursue other available legal remedies in accordance with the law, leaving avenues open for continued litigation.
Case Identifiers
Petitioner's Counsel
Respondent's Counsel
Advocates on Record
eCourtsIndia AITM
Brief Facts Summary
This Special Leave Petition (C) No. 7516/2022 was filed by Mirasab Yakubsab Mujawar & Ors. against Saifan Hasan Ali Mujawar & Ors. challenging a final judgment and order dated February 23, 2022, passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in CRA No. 559/2019. The Supreme Court heard the matter on April 29, 2022, for admission and interlocutory reliefs.
Timeline of Events
Initial case (CRA No. 559/2019) registered in the High Court of Judicature at Bombay.
High Court of Judicature at Bombay passed the impugned final judgment and order in CRA No. 559/2019.
Special Leave Petition No. 9218/2022 filed in the Supreme Court.
Special Leave Petition registered as 7516/2022.
Supreme Court heard the Special Leave Petition and dismissed it.
Key Factual Findings
The Court finds no reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the High Court.
Source: Current Court Finding
Primary Legal Issues
Secondary Legal Issues
Statutes Applied
Petitioner's Arguments
The petitioners, through their counsel, sought admission of their Special Leave Petition, implicitly arguing that the impugned High Court order warranted intervention by the Supreme Court.
Respondent's Arguments
The respondents, through their counsel, implicitly argued against the admission of the Special Leave Petition, contending that the High Court's order did not require interference.
Court's Reasoning
The Court determined that there was no sufficient ground or reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the High Court. This suggests that the petitioners failed to demonstrate an error of law, a substantial injustice, or any other compelling reason that would warrant the exercise of the Supreme Court's extraordinary powers under Article 136.
- Judicial Restraint (in exercising Special Leave Petition powers)
Impugned Orders
Specific Directions
- 1.It shall be open to the petitioners to avail such other remedy as may be available to them in accordance with law.
Precedential Assessment
Non-Binding (Procedural)
This is a brief dismissal order without detailed reasoning, often referred to as a dismissal in limine. It does not lay down any new principle of law but reaffirms the Supreme Court's discretionary power under Article 136 without providing a detailed analysis of the merits, hence its precedential value is limited.
Tips for Legal Practice
Legal Tags
Disclaimer: eCourtsIndia (ECI) is not a lawyer and this analysis is generated by ECI AI, it might make mistakes. This is not a legal advice. Please consult with a qualified legal professional for matters requiring legal expertise.
Order Issued After Hearing
Purpose:
FRESH
Before:
Hon'ble Hemant Gupta, Hon'ble V. Ramasubramanian
Stage:
FRESH (FOR ADMISSION) - CIVIL CASES
Remarks:
Dismissed
Listed On:
29 Apr 2022
In:
Judge
Category:
UNKNOWN
Original Order Copy
Get a certified copy of this order
Order Text
COURT NO.11
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) $No(s)$ . 7516/2022
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 23-02-2022 in CRA No. 559/2019 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At Bombay)
MIRASAB YAKUBSAB MUJAWAR & ORS.
Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
SAIFAN HASAN ALI MUJAWAR & ORS.
Respondent $(s)$
(FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.61248/2022-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.61253/2022-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.)
Date: 29-04-2022 This petition was called on for hearing today.
- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN
- Mr. Pravartak Pathak, Adv. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Shankev Agrawal, AOR
- For Respondent(s) Ms. Akriti Choubey, Adv. Mr. Ejaz Maqbool, AOR Mr. Saif Zia, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R
We find no reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the High Court. The Special Leave Petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
However, it shall be open to the petitioners to avail such other remedy as may be available to them in accordance with law.
Pending interlocutory application(s) is/are disposed of.
JAYANT KUMAR ARORA) COURT MASTER
(RENU BALA GAMBHIR) COURT MASTER