Sailendra Nath Das vs. Union Of India
AI Summary
Get an AI-powered analysis of this court order
Order Issued After Hearing
Purpose:
Fixed Date by Court
Before:
Hon'ble Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Hon'ble M.M. Sundresh
Stage:
AFTER NOTICE (FOR ADMISSION) - CIVIL CASES
Remarks:
Disposed off
Listed On:
11 Aug 2021
In:
Judge
Category:
UNKNOWN
Original Order Copy
Get a certified copy of this order
Order Text
ITEM NO.31 Court 6 (Video Conferencing) SECTION XVI
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 14163/2015
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 21-04-2015 in CAN No. 1904/2014 21-04-2015 in MAT No. 283/2014 passed by the High Court At Calcutta)
KAMAL KRISHNA NASKAR
Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
Respondent $(s)$
WITH
SLP(C) No. 14188/2015 (XVI) SLP(C) No. 14198/2015 (XVI) SLP(C) No. 14208/2015 (XVI) SLP(C) No. 14270/2015 (XVI) SLP(C) No. 15102/2015 (XVI) IA No. 131185/2019 - VACATING STAY) SLP(C) No. 14327/2015 (XVI) SLP(C) No. 14395/2015 (XVI) SLP(C) No. 14403/2015 (XVI)
Date: 08-11-2021 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. SUNDRESH
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Ajit Kr. Sinha, Sr. Adv. Mr. Anurag Pandey, AOR Ms. Reena Pandey, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Sanjay Jain, ASG Mr. Pranay Ranjan, Adv. Ms. Shubhangi Tuli, Adv. Mr. Bhuvan Mishra, Adv. Mr. Anukalp Jain, Adv. Mr. Amrish Kumar, AOR
Mr. B. Krishna Prasad, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R
The impugned order(s) being in the nature of an interim order, we would loath to interfere with the
same. In fact, what is pointed out is that the issuance of notice and the grant of stay has created an accumulation of arrears.
On our query learned counsel for the petitioner(s) submits that the apprehension of the petitioners is arising from the direction to deposit 25% of the arrears as on the date of the revived demand within four weeks from the date of the order being followed by the direction that the entire sum shall be paid within four weeks.
We see no reason for any apprehension as in our reading the impugned order is quite clear in its terms. Be that as it may, we make it more clear as under:
a) The arrears of the demand have to be paid only to the extent of 25% of the amount demanded and that period will now be four weeks from today;
b) The current licence fee have to be paid without default till disposal of the writ petition as per impugned order dated 21.04.2015 which shall continue to be so paid;
c) If any arrears have accumulated so far as current licence fee post stay order are
2
concerned on account of misinterpretation of the order passed even by this Court, those arrears should also be cleared within four weeks from today.
Looking to the nature of the controversy, we would expect the learned Single Judge to bestow early consideration to the matter, more so, as it is stated that on pretext of the Special Leave Petition (s) pending, the main matter has not been decided.
The Special Leave Petitions accordingly stand disposed of.
Pending application(s) stand(s) disposed of.
(ASHA SUNDRIYAL) (POONAM VAID) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)