Back
2019 Supreme(SC) 1753
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Indira Banerjee, JJ.
Elmvale Holdings Limited - Appellant
Versus
High Court Of Judicature At Bombay & Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 175 of 2019
Decided On : 05-03-2019
Kapil Sibal, Adv., P.S. Narasimha, Adv., Rajshekhar Rao, Adv., Ritin Rai, Adv., Mayank Pandey, Adv., Shyam Divan, Adv., A.P. Mayee, Adv., Chirag Jain, Adv.
The court's reluctance to interfere with the Chief Justice's discretion and the suggestion for the parties to make a joint request for reconsideration.
Headnote:
discretion - writ petition - The court declined to interfere with the Chief Justice's discretion in the matter at issue, emphasizing the need for the parties to jointly request the Chief Justice to reconsider the decision.
Fact of the Case:
The court declined to interfere with the Chief Justice's discretion in the matter at issue.
Finding of the Court:
The court emphasized the need for the parties to jointly request the Chief Justice to reconsider the decision.
Issues:
Ratio Decidendi: The court declined to interfere with the Chief Justice's discretion and suggested that the parties should make a joint request to the Chief Justice for reconsideration.
Final Decision: The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
ORDER
1. On hearing learned counsel for the parties, we are not inclined to interfere with the discretion of the Chief Justice in respect of the matter in issue. However, we may note that in terms of the order passed on 27.11.2008, the learned Single Judge noticed that "the matter therefore needs to be reserved for orders". This is preceded by the expression "the matter was fully argued and the same was placed for written submissions". Thereafter, it is recorded that the written submissions were tendered on that date.
2. It would be appropriate for the parties to again jointly make a request to the Chief Justice in this behalf who may consider it in conspectus of the aforesaid at his discretion.
3. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
