M/S MARUTI CLEAN COAL & POWER LTD. versus B.L. WADHERA & ORS.

Citation: [2008] 2 S.C.R. 182 · Decided: 29-01-2008 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ARIJIT PASAYAT · Disposal: Disposed off
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

[2008] 2 S.C.R. 182 
A 
MIS MARUTI CLEAN COAL & POWER LTD. 
II. 
B.L. WADHERA & ORS. 
(TranSfer Petition (Civil) No. 813 of 2007) 
B 
JANUARY 29, 2008 
(DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND P. SATHASIVAM, JJ.) 
-1' 
t 
Transfer of Cases: 
c 
Transfer petition -
Seeking transfer of certain writ 
petitions, writ appeals pending before Chattisgarh High Court 
and certain suits pending before civil courts in the State - Order 
of High Court challenged before Supreme Court in SLP -
HELD: Transfer petition and SLP disposed of with directions, 
inter alia: parties would appear on given date before the Bench 
D presided over by the Chief Justice of High Court - All writ 
petitions would be tagged and would be heard along with writ 
appeals by a Division Bench - Bench presided over by the 
-1· 
...,.. 
Chief Justice would transfer civil suits pending before lower 
courts to High Court to be taken up alongwith the writ petitions 
E and writ appeals - If cases involving dispute pending before 
High Court are instituted after instant order, the same would 
~---
be trarr§ferred to and heard by said Division Bench of the High 
~
~ 
Court -
Petitioners in SLP would be at liberty to seek 
modification/vacation of order impugned therein before 
F Division Bench of High Court. 
f' 
TN. Godavarman Thirumulpad vs. Union of India and 
Ors. [2006] 5 SCC 28 - cited. 
CIVIL ORIGINAL/APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Transfer 
Petition (Civil) No. 813 of 2007. 
G 
WITH 
)-
,, 
SLP(C) No. 21632 of 2007, SLP(C) No. 20238 of 2006, 
Cont.Pet.(C) No. 27512007 in SLP(C) No. 20238/2006 and 
Cont.Pet(C) No. 14/2008 in T.P.(C) No. 813/2007. 
H 
182 
-+ 
M/S MARUTI CLEAN COAL & POWER LTD. v. 
183 
B.L. WADHERA & ORS. [PASAYAT, J.] 
--
·~ 
Mukul Rohtagi, Ranjit Kumar, V. Krishnamurthy, Ram A 
Jethmalani, C.S. Vaidyanathan, C. Mukhopadhya, Amit Sibbal, 
T. Raja, M/S. Suresh A. Shroff & Co. and Senthil Jagadeesan 
for the Petitioner. 
Gopal Subramanium, A.S.G., P.P. Rao, Ashok H. Desai, 
B 
K.K. Venugopal, Ravi Shankar Prasad, Ajit Kumar Sinha, 
+-
Jitendra Mohan Sharma, Rudreshwar Singh, Kaushik Poddar, 
' 
Kumar Ranjan, Gopal Kumar Jha, Sanjay jain, Sameer Parekh 
(for MIS Parekh And Co.), Vishwajit Singh, Arvind Kumar Shukla, 
D.D. Karnath, Shweta Garg, Devadatt Kamat, D.S. Mahra, 
Suparna Srivastava and Rajesh Srivastava for the Respondents. c 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Heard learned counsel for the 
parties. 
Delay in filing counter affidavit is condoned. Amendment D 
allowed. 
> 
In the transfer petition, prayer is made for transfer of certain 
. ~ 
Writ Petitions before the Chhatisgarh High Court, Writ Appeals 
and Suits filed before the Lower Court in the State of Chattisgarh. 
E 
In S.L.P. (C) No.21632 of 2007, challenge is to the interim order 
dated 31.10.2007 passed in Writ Appeal No.267 of 2007. 
·Learned counsel for the petitioners in the Transfer Petition 
and the Special Leave Petition submitted that though the subject 
,..\. 
matter of controversy in all the aforesaid cases is broadly covered F 
~ 
by a decision of this Court in IN. Godavarman Thirumulpad Vs. 
· Union of India and Ors. (2006 (5) sec 28), the fresh rounds of 
litigation have been and/or are being started with the sole object of 
taking away the effect of the judgment in the said case. This is 
stoutly denied by learned counsel appearing for the respondents. 
G 
.-( 
Considering the nature of the controversy, we feel that 
interest of justice would be best served if the Transfer Petition 
(along with I.A. Nos.2 and 3 in the Transfer Petition) and the 
Special Leave Petition are disposed of on the following terms: 
1. All the Writ Petitions and Writ Appeals detailed in the 
pt 
+-
' 
184 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2008] 2 S.C.R. 
A 
Transfer Petition and the I .A. Nos.2 and 3 shall be heard 
-l' 
and disposed of by the High Court by 15.05.2008. 
2. The parties are directed to appear before the Bench 
presided over by Hon'ble the Chief Justice of the High 
Court, without further notice, on 11.02.2008 so that a firm 
B 
date can be fixed for starting hearing of the Writ Petitions 
and the Writ Appeals. Though the Writ Petitions are 
normally heard by a single Judge in the High Cour:t. in 
-t 
I 
view of the fact that the Writ Appeals are to be heard by 
the Division Bench, all those Writ Petitions shall be tagged 
c 
on and shall be heard by a Division Bench. 
3. Ir is stated that certain Suits are pending before the 
Lower Courts. The Bench presided over by H
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.