Back
2011 Supreme(SC) 1156
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
D.K. Jain and Anil R. Dave, JJ.
Meena Chaudhary - Appellant
Versus
Commissioner Of Delhi Police And Others - Respondents.
IAs Nos. 7-8 of 2011 in Civil Appeals Nos. 8439-40 of 2009
Decided on : 23-09-2011
An interim application cannot have a scope broader than its corresponding main appeal, nor can it be used to grant the primary relief sought in the main appeal, as this would render the main proceedings redundant.
Headnote:(A) Civil Procedure - Interim Applications - Scope and Maintainability - Prayer for interim relief which constitutes the core issue of the main appeal cannot be granted as it would render the main appeal redundant - Scope of an interim application cannot be broader than the scope of the main appeal - Reliefs sought that do not arise for consideration in the main appeals cannot be granted through interim applications.
Facts of the case:
In a pending civil appeal, the appellant filed interim applications seeking maintenance and residence in a matrimonial home, the confiscation of the respondent's passport and professional license, and the initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondent.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the request for maintenance and residence was the central issue of the main appeals and granting it would make the appeals redundant. Further, the requests regarding the passport, license, and contempt were beyond the scope of the main appeals.
Issues: Whether interim reliefs can be granted when they either encompass the core subject matter of the main appeal or exceed the scope of the main appellate proceedings.
Ratio Decidendi: An interim application must remain within the scope of the main proceedings; it cannot be used to resolve the primary dispute of the appeal prematurely, nor can it be used to seek reliefs that are not part of the main appellate consideration.
Result: both the applications, being bereft of any merit, are dismissed.
Legal Category Hierarchy
-
practice and procedure
-
interim applications
- scope of relief
- contempt of court
-
interim applications
-
family law
-
matrimonial disputes
- maintenance
- residence
-
matrimonial disputes
ORDER
IAs Nos. 7-8 of 2011 in CAs Nos. 8439-40 of 2009
By these applications, the appellant prays for the following reliefs:
“(a) pass an urgent and interim order for a maintenance and a residence for the appellant in her suitable amount of matrimonial home;
(b) pass an order to secure the compliance by Respondent 4 by confiscating his passport and his current CPL (Commercial Pilot Licence);
(c) pass an order for sentence against Respondent 4 for contempt of this Hon'ble Court;”
We have heard the appellant, who appears in person, as also the learned counsel appearing for the contesting Respondent 4.
In our view, the present applications are utterly misconceived for more than one reason. Firstly, Prayer (a), which is sought as an interim relief, is the core issue to be determined in the main appeals, which already stands admitted. Therefore, grant of this relief at this juncture would render the main appeals as redundant. Secondly, Prayers (b) and (c) above, both these issues do not arise for consideration in the main appeals. The scope of an interim application cannot be greater in scope than the main appeal. Additionally, over and above the afore-extracted reliefs, the appellant has also prayed for certain other directions in her rejoinder-affidavit. Ex facie, the said prayers are also beyond the scope of the main appeals and, therefore, cannot be granted. Accordingly, both the applications, being bereft of any merit, are dismissed.
At this stage, it is pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for Respondent 4 that Suit No. 51 of 2008, which had given rise to the present appeals, has since been dismissed by the Metropolitan Magistrate vide order dated 21-9-2011, passed in CC No. 619 of 2001. Let the said order be placed on record by way of an application, supported by affidavit, with advance copy to the appellant. If considered necessary, the appellant may file reply to the said application.
IAs Nos. 9-10, 11-12, 13-14 and … of 2011 in CAs Nos. 8439-40 of 2009
List the applications along with the main matter.
