IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 21.03.2018

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.MANIKUMAR

AND

THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN

W.P.No.6326 of 2018

and WMP No.7878 of 2018

1. Kalyan Mohan

2. Keerthi Sarayau

... Petitioners

vs.

1. The Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal

at Chennai,

Ethiraj Salai, Chennai - 600 008.

Rep. by its Registrar.

2. Tamilnadu Mercantile Bank,

Rep. by its authorised Officer,

No.25, Venkatnarayana Road,

T.Nagar, Chennai - 17.

3. Mrs.W.Kasthuri Bai

... Respondents

WRIT Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India, praying for the issuance of a writ of certiorari, calling

for the records of the 1st respondent dated 31.08.2017 in

I.A.No.1377 of 2017 in R.A.S.A.90/2013 quash the same.

For Petitioner

: Mr.Niranjan Rajagopalan

for M/s.G.R.Associates

ORDER

(Order of the Court was delivered by S.MANIKUMAR, J)

Challenging the order of the Debts Recovery Appellate

Tribunal, Chennai, made in I.A.No.1377 of 2017 in RA (SA) No.90

of 2013 dated 31.08.2017, instant writ petition has been filed.

2. In I.A.No.1377 of 2017 in RA (SA) No.90 of 2013 dated

31.08.2017, the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, has

directed pre deposit of Rs.25 Crores. Debts Recovery Appellate

Tribunal, Chennai, has directed IA to be listed on 28.09.2017

for confirmation.

3. On this day, when the writ petition came up for

admission, Mr.Niranjan Rajagopalan, learned counsel for the

petitioner submitted that IA has been dismissed on 28.09.2017

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

and consequently, appeal in RA(SA) No.90 of 2013, has also been

dismissed.

4. It is well settled that an interim order passed, merges

with the disposal of the main case. Accordingly, interim order

made in I.A.No.1377 of 2017 dated 31.08.2017 merges with the

final order made in RA(SA) No.90 of 2013 dated 28.09.2017. On

the principle of law that interim order merges with final

orders, we deem it fit to consider few decisions.

(i) In South Eastern Coalfields Ltd v. State of MP and

Others reported in (2003) 8 SCC 648, the Hon'ble Supreme Court

held as follows:

"The scope of the provision is wide enough so as

to include therein almost all the kinds of variation,

reversal, setting aside or modification of a decree or

order. The interim order passed by the court merges

into a final decision. The validity of an interim

order, passed in favour of a party, stands reversed in

the event of a final decision going against the party

successful at the interim stage.

(ii) In Prem Chandra Agarwal and Another v. Uttar Pradesh

Financial Corporation and Others reported in (2009) 11 SCC 479,

the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that once a final order is

passed, all the earlier interim orders merge into the final

order, the interim orders cease to exist.

(iii) In State of West Bengal and Others Vs Banibrata Ghosh

and Others reported in (2009) 3 SCC 250, the Hon'ble Apex Court

held that the Interim Order does not decide the fate of the

parties to the litigation finally, it is always subject to and

merges with the final order passed in the proceedings.

5. In view of the decisions stated supra, nothing survives

for adjudication in the instant writ petition filed against an

interim order in I.A.No.1377 of 2017 in RA (SA) No.90 of 2013

dated 31.08.2017. Hence, instant writ petition is dismissed.

No costs. Consequently, the connected writ miscellaneous

petition is closed.

Sd/-

Assistant Registrar(CCC)

//True Copy//

Sub Assistant Registrar

ars

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

To

1. The Registrar,

Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal

Ethiraj Salai, Chennai - 600 008.

W.P.No.6326 of 2018

and WMP No.7878 of 2018

ev(co)

aa09/04/2018

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/