Shri Nath Cargo Pvt. Ltd vs. Parag Sarees

Court:Supreme Court of India
Judge:Hon'ble Jagdish Singh Khehar
Case Status:Disposed
Order Date:8 Oct 2014
CNR:SCIN010226802014

AI Summary

The Supreme Court dismissed a Special Leave Petition filed by M/S Shri Nath Cargo Pvt. LTD, declining to interfere with the Delhi High Court's decision. This order signifies the finality of the High Court's judgment in the underlying dispute, emphasizing the limited scope of the Supreme Court's discretionary power under Article 136.

Ratio Decidendi:
The Supreme Court will not interfere with an order of a lower court under Article 136 of the Constitution of India if it finds no exceptional circumstances, substantial question of law, or grave injustice warranting the exercise of its extraordinary discretionary jurisdiction, thereby reinforcing the principle of judicial restraint in SLP matters.

Case Identifiers

Primary Case No:25847/2014
Case Type:Special Leave Petition (Civil)
Case Sub-Type:Civil Appeal
Secondary Case Numbers:22680/2014, SCIN010226802014
Order Date:2014-10-08
Filing Year:2014
Court:Supreme Court Of India
Bench:Division Bench
Judges:Hon'ble Jagdish Singh Khehar, Hon'ble Arun Mishra

Petitioner's Counsel

S.K. Srivastva
Advocate - Appeared
Rajender Prasad
Advocate - Appeared

Advocates on Record

Rajender Prasad

eCourtsIndia AITM

Brief Facts Summary

M/S Shri Nath Cargo Pvt. LTD filed a Special Leave Petition (Civil) in the Supreme Court, challenging a final judgment and order dated April 17, 2014, delivered by the High Court of Delhi in RSA No. 79/2014. The Supreme Court, after hearing arguments from the petitioner's counsel, dismissed the petition, concluding that no grounds were made out for interference under Article 136 of the Constitution of India.

Timeline of Events

2014-04-17

High Court of Delhi passed the final judgment and order in RSA No. 79/2014.

2014-07-15

Filing of the Special Leave Petition in the Supreme Court.

2014-09-15

Registration of the Special Leave Petition in the Supreme Court.

2014-10-08

Supreme Court heard and dismissed the Special Leave Petition.

Key Factual Findings

No ground for interference is made out in exercise of our jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution of India.

Source: Current Court Finding

Primary Legal Issues

1.Whether the High Court's judgment in RSA No. 79/2014 warrants interference by the Supreme Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution of India.

Statutes Applied

Constitution of India
Article 136
Supreme Court's extraordinary discretionary power to grant special leave to appeal from any judgment, decree, determination, sentence or order in any cause or matter passed or made by any court or tribunal.

Petitioner's Arguments

The counsel for the petitioner, M/S Shri Nath Cargo Pvt. LTD, presented arguments aiming to convince the Supreme Court that the impugned judgment of the Delhi High Court was flawed or unjust, thereby necessitating the Supreme Court's intervention under Article 136.

Respondent's Arguments

No arguments were recorded or presented on behalf of the respondent side, as the court proceeded to hear only the petitioner's counsel.

Court's Reasoning

The Supreme Court, after considering the arguments put forth by the petitioner's counsel, found 'no ground for interference' in the exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution of India. This implies that the Court did not find any exceptional circumstances, grave injustice, or a substantial question of law that would warrant the use of its extraordinary discretionary powers to overturn or modify the High Court's decision.

Judicial Philosophy Indicators:
  • Emphasis on Judicial Restraint
  • Adherence to Appellate Jurisdictional Limits
Order Nature:Substantive
Disposition Status:Disposed
Disposition Outcome:Dismissed

Impugned Orders

High Court Of Delhi At N. Delhi
Case: RSA No. 79/2014
Date: 2014-04-17

Precedential Assessment

Non-Binding (Procedural)

This is a summary dismissal of a Special Leave Petition without detailed reasoning on the merits of the underlying dispute. It reaffirms the established principle regarding the discretionary nature and narrow scope of Article 136 jurisdiction, rather than laying down a new principle of law.

Tips for Legal Practice

1.Counsel filing SLPs must demonstrate compelling reasons or a substantial question of law for the Supreme Court to exercise its Article 136 jurisdiction.
2.A summary dismissal under Article 136 generally signifies that the lower court's decision did not suffer from such a serious error as to warrant apex court intervention.
3.Understanding the limited scope of Article 136 is critical for advising clients on the likelihood of success in a Special Leave Petition.

Legal Tags

Supreme Court Dismissal of Special Leave PetitionArticle 136 Discretionary Jurisdiction Non-InterferenceFinality of High Court Civil JudgmentAppellate Jurisdiction Supreme Court of IndiaReaffirmation of Judicial Restraint Principle

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:

Case Registered

Listed On:

15 Sept 2014

Original Order Copy

Get a certified copy of this order

Download True Copy

Order Text

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). 25847/2014 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 17/04/2014 in RSA No. 79/2014 passed by the High Court Of Delhi At N. Delhi)

M/S SHRI NATH CARGO PVT. LTD Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

M/S PARAG SAREES Respondent(s) (with interim relief and office report)

Date : 08/10/2014 This petition was called on for hearing today.

CORAM :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MISHRA

For Petitioner(s) Mr. S.K. Srivastva, Adv. Mr. Rajender Prasad,AOR

For Respondent(s)

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

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

No ground for interference is made out in exercise of

our jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution of India.

The special leave petition is dismissed.

(Parveen Kr. Chawla) (Phoolan Wati Arora) Court Master Assistant Registrar Signature Not Verified

Digitally signed by Parveen Kumar Chawla Date: 2014.10.09 16:26:08 IST Reason: