13 February 2009
Supreme Court
Download

SATPAL SINGH Vs CHUNNI LAL(D) TR.LRS.

Bench: TARUN CHATTERJEE,H.L. DATTU, , ,
Case number: C.A. No.-003542-003542 / 2009
Diary number: 17538 / 2008
Advocates: PRATIBHA JAIN Vs B. D. SHARMA


1

NON-REPORTABLE      

   IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA    CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

  SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION © NO. 15587 OF 2008

Satpal Singh                         …Petitioner

VERSUS

Chunni Lal (D) through LRs.              ..Respondents

O R D E R

1. On  14th of  July,  2008,  this  Court  entertained  the

special leave petition and passed the following order :  

“Issue notice on the special leave petition   as also on the prayer for interim relief.”

2. On  notice  being  served,  the  respondents  are  now

represented by their learned counsel. The learned counsel

for  the  respondents  has  drawn  our  attention  to  the

undertaking  filed  by  the  petitioner  in  the  High  Court

showing that he shall  vacate  the premises in question,  a

copy  of  the  said  undertaking  has  also  been  brought  on

record. Since the petitioner has filed the undertaking before

1

2

the  High  Court  and  thereafter  filed  the  special  leave

petition,  we  do  not  think,  in  the  exercise  of  our

discretionary  power,  to  grant  any  interim  order  to  the

petitioner.  Mr.Sushil  Kumar  Jain,  learned  counsel

appearing  for  the  petitioner  however,  has  drawn  our

attention to the two decisions of this Court in the cases of

P.R.Deshpande  vs.  Maruti  Balaram  Haibatti [1998  (6)

SCC  507] and  A.V.G.P.Chettiar  &  Sons  and  Ors.  vs.

T.Palanisamy Gounder [2002 (5) SCC 337]. Relying on the

aforesaid two decisions, Mr.Jain submitted that in spite of

the fact that an undertaking has been filed by the petitioner

to vacate the premises in question, even then the petitioner

is entitled to an interim order of stay of dispossession. We

are not inclined to go into this question as grant of stay of

dispossession  during  the  pendency  of  a  Special  Leave

Petition is a discretion of the court. In view of the conduct

of the petitioner that the petitioner has suppressed the fact

of filing of an undertaking in the Court, we are of the view

that  no  interim  order  should  be  granted  in  this  matter.

Since we have already issued notice on the Special Leave

2

3

Petition  and  also  on the  prayer  for  interim stay  and the

respondent has already entered appearance and filed reply

to the petition, let the matter be listed for final disposal on

any  miscellaneous  day  in  the  first  week  of  May,  2009.

Rejoinder, if there be any, be filed within three weeks from

this date.  

…………………….J. [Tarun Chatterjee]

New Delhi;                        ………… ……….J.

February 13, 2009.                           [H.L.Dattu]

3