2022 (9) TMI 1502 - SCH - Companies Law

Maintainability of SLP - filing of fresh IA (Interim Application), when no relief granted on previous IA - HELD THAT - The filing of successive IAs before the High Court, after no relief had been granted in a previous IA, was manifestly an abuse of the process. On these grounds, we see no reason to entertain the Special Leave Petition. However, it needs to be clarified that the observations in the impugned order of the High Court are confined to the issue as to whether the Single Judge was justified in declining to exercise the discretion in an application for the grant of ad interim relief. SLP dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Abuse of process through successive interim applications before the High Court.
2. Justification of the Single Judge's decision to decline granting ad interim relief.

Analysis:
1. The Supreme Court, comprising Hon'ble Dr. Justice D.Y. Chandrachud and Hon'ble Ms. Justice Hima Kohli, heard arguments from counsels representing the petitioner, second respondent, and third respondent. The Court noted that a previous application for similar reliefs had been rejected by the Single Judge of the High Court. The fresh application was based on a change in circumstances following a judgment by the Supreme Court. The Court found the successive filing of applications to be an abuse of process, as the reliefs sought were essentially the same. Consequently, the Special Leave Petition was not entertained due to this abuse of process.

2. The Court clarified that its decision was based on the abuse of process through successive applications. It emphasized that the observations in the impugned order of the High Court were limited to whether the Single Judge rightly declined to exercise discretion in granting ad interim relief. With this clarification, the Court dismissed the Special Leave Petition, effectively upholding the Single Judge's decision. Any pending applications were disposed of in light of this judgment.