Top
Begin typing your search above and press return to search.
Top Stories

Six Months Cap On Interim Stay Orders Not Applicable To Supreme Court Orders: SC [Read Order]

Ashok Kini
3 Aug 2019 4:26 PM GMT
Six Months Cap On Interim Stay Orders  Not Applicable To Supreme Court Orders: SC [Read Order]
x
"The judgment of this Court in Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency's case (supra) is sought to be relied upon by difference courts even in respect of interim orders granted by this Court where the period of 6 months has expired"

Is the Supreme Court's direction in Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Private Limited. vs. Central Bureau of Investigation that the interim stay on civil/criminal proceedings would end on expiry of six months from the date of such order unless extension is granted by a speaking order, applicable to Supreme Court orders?According to the bench comprising Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice...

Your free access to Live Law has expired
To read the article, get a premium account.
    Your Subscription Supports Independent Journalism
Subscription starts from
599+GST
(For 6 Months)
Premium account gives you:
  • Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.
  • Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.
Already a subscriber?

Is the Supreme Court's direction in Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Private Limited. vs. Central Bureau of Investigation that the interim stay on civil/criminal proceedings would end on expiry of six months from the date of such order unless extension is granted by a speaking order, applicable to Supreme Court orders?

According to the bench comprising Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice KM Joseph, it will not. In FAZALULLAH KHAN vs. M.AKBAR CONTRACTOR (D), the bench observed thus:

if the interim order granted by this Court is not vacated and continues beyond a period of 6 months by reason of pendency of the appeal, it cannot be said that the interim order would automatically stand vacated

In this case, interim protection was granted by the Supreme Court to a tenant facing eviction proceedings in March 2009. The tenant filed an application in his pending appeal before the Apex Court contending that, relying on Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency's case (supra), the revisional court seeks to proceed on a ground that, on the expiry of period of six months, the interim stay granted by the Supreme Court is no more in force. In this context, the bench observed:

We are constrained to pen down a more detailed order as the judgment of this Court in Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency's case (supra) is sought to be relied upon by difference courts even in respect of interim orders granted by this Court where the period of 6 months has expired. Such a course of action is not permissible and if the interim order granted by this Court is not vacated and continues beyond a period of 6 months by reason of pendency of the appeal, it cannot be said that the interim order would automatically stand vacated.

The Court then said that the interim order granted by it on 20th March, 2009 must continue to be in force till the appeal is decided. The aforesaid observation made by us should be kept in mind by both the trial Court and the High Court while dealing with this aspect, it added. Considering the fact that the appeal is of the year 2011, the bench posted it for hearing in the week commencing 20th August,2019. 

 Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Private Limited Judgment

In this case, the judgment of Justice Adarsh Kumar Goel and Justice Navin Sinha, concurred by Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman, contained the following important observations:

  • In all pending cases where stay against proceedings of a civil or criminal trial is operating, the same will come to an end on expiry of six months from today unless in an exceptional case by a speaking order such stay is extended.
  • In cases where stay is granted in future, the same will end on expiry of six months from the date of such order unless similar extension is granted by a speaking order.
  • The speaking order must show that the case was of such exceptional nature that continuing the stay was more important than having the trial finalized.
  • The trial Court where order of stay of civil or criminal proceedings is produced, may fix a date not beyond six months of the order of stay so that on expiry of period of stay, proceedings can commence unless order of extension of stay is produced.

Click here to Download Order

Read Order


Next Story
Share it