K. A. NATARAJAN ETC. versus M. NAINA MOHD. & ORS. ETC.

K. A. NATARAJAN ETC. versus M. NAINA MOHD. & ORS. ETC.

The Supreme Court declined to interfere at the interlocutory stage since the appeal was still pending before the High Court and the Division Bench only gave effect to the single judge's order without passing a new order, leaving all questions open for final decision in appeal.

Parties
Petitioner: K. A. Natarajan; Respondent: M. Naina Mohd.; Petitioner: R. Gopalakrishnan; Petitioner: S. Mohan Kumaramangalam; Petitioner: M. K. Ramamurthi; Petitioner: G. Ramaswamy; Petitioner: Shyamala Pappu; Petitioner: Vineet Kumar; Petitioner: A. S. Nambiar; Petitioner: M. C. Setalvad; Petitioner: V. Subramanian; Petitioner: K. Jayaram; Respondent: O. C. Mathur; Respondent: K. Thirumalai; Respondent: A. T. M. Sampath; Respondent: E. C. Agtawala
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
03 February 1970
Procedural Posture
Petitions for Special Leave to Appeal (civil) Under Article 136 of the Constitution / Interlocutory Order; Petitions Dismissed at Threshold
Outcome
Special leave petitions dismissed.
Legal Topics
Special Leave to Appeal, Interlocutory Order, Jurisdiction of High Courts, Transport Permits
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Special Leave to Appeal Interlocutory Order Jurisdiction of High Courts Transport Permits

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

K. A. Natarajan

Petitioner

M. Naina Mohd.

Respondent

R. Gopalakrishnan

Petitioner

S. Mohan Kumaramangalam

Petitioner

M. K. Ramamurthi

Petitioner

G. Ramaswamy

Petitioner

Shyamala Pappu

Petitioner

Vineet Kumar

Petitioner

A. S. Nambiar

Petitioner

M. C. Setalvad

Petitioner

V. Subramanian

Petitioner

K. Jayaram

Petitioner

O. C. Mathur

Respondent

K. Thirumalai

Respondent

A. T. M. Sampath

Respondent

E. C. Agtawala

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Petitions for Special Leave to Appeal (civil) Under Article 136 of the Constitution / Interlocutory Order; Petitions Dismissed at Threshold

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Supreme Court should interfere under Article 136 with an interlocutory order passed by the High Court regarding the operation of a transport permit.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court declined to interfere at the interlocutory stage since the appeal was still pending before the High Court and the Division Bench only gave effect to the single judge's order without passing a new order, leaving all questions open for final decision in appeal.

Court Disposition

Special leave petitions dismissed.

Orders

  • Special leave petitions dismissed.
  • Stay granted by this Court is vacated.