Join our Law Notes WhatsApp Group and stay updated with Legal and Judicial Updates
The Supreme Court generally takes a petition against a discretionary interim order passed by the High Court only in atypical cases such as, for example, as seen in, Southern Petrochemical Industries Corpn. Ltd. v. Madras Refineries Ltd., (1998) 9 SCC 209, Maharashtra SEB v. Vaman, (1999) 3 SCC 132, and United Bank of India v. Satyawati Tondon, (2010) 8 SCC 110) where, for example, the repercussions are grave or the legal basis for passing the interim order are obscure (Union of India v. Swadeshi Cotton Mills Co.Ltd., (1978) 4 SCC 295); or there is a miscarriage of justice (Joginder Nath Gupta v. Satish Chander Gupta, (1983) 2 SCC 325); or it is imperative that this Court exercises its corrective jurisdiction (Kishor Kirtilal Mehta and Ors. v. Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust, (2007) 10 SCC 21).
- VNS College of Physical Education and Management Studies and Others v State of Madhya Pradesh and Others, Civil Appeal Jurisdiction, Civil Appeal No 13353 OF 2015, Supreme Court of India judgment dated November 6, 2015
- State of Orissa vs Madan Goal Rangoota, AIR 1952 SC 12: An interim order is given as incidental remedy before deciding a case on merits.