SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(SC) 9890

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
RAJESH BINDAL, MANMOHAN, JJ
SJVN LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
M/S PATEL GAMMON JOINT VENTURE – Respondent
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2025 | SLP (C) No. 8878/2025 | FAO (OS) No. 23 of 2024 | O.M.P. No. 189 of 2021 | C.S. No. 83 of 2019



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: M/S. Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas Aor, AOR, Mr. Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General, Mr. Omar Ahmad, Adv., Mr. Ishan Gaur, Adv., Mr. Vikram Shah, Adv., Mr. Ritik Kumar Rath, Adv., Mr. Siddhart Kothari, Adv., Mr. Vikash Kumar Jha, Adv.
For the Respondents: Mr. Ritin Rai, Sr. Adv., Mr. K. R. Sasiprabhu, AOR, Mr. Aditya Swarup, Adv., Mr. Hiten Sampat, Adv., Mr. Vishnu Sharma A S, Adv., Mr. Ribhav Pande, Adv., Ms. Namrata Saraogi, Adv.

The court reinstated the prior order recognizing the existence of triable issues while correcting the procedural oversight of the lower court.

Headnote:The legal provision invoked involves Order VII Rule 11, CPC, wherein the High Court, in its order dated 23.12.2024, set aside the earlier judgement from 15.12.2023 allowing the respondent's application. The court highlighted that there are triable issues in the underlying suit and emphasized that the matter should be remitted to the High Court for a decision including all arguments from both parties. The significant question addressed was regarding the fairness of the original order and whether it adequately considered the merits of the case. Consequently, the Court allowed the appeal, restoring the previous order, allowing the suit to be reviewed on its merits, and instructed that pending applications would be resolved accordingly.

Table of Content
1. remittance to high court for merits review. (Para 2 , 3)
2. recognition of existing triable issues. (Para 4)

O R D E R

1. Leave granted.

2. Challenge in the present appeal is to the order dated 23.12.2024 passed by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla in FAO (OS) No. 23 of 2024.

3. Vide the aforesaid order, the High Court had set aside the order dated 15.12.2023 passed by learned Single Judge of the High Court in O.M.P. No. 189 of 2021 in C.S. No. 83 of 2019 as a result of which an application filed by the respondent Order VII Rule 11, CPC was allowed.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent fairly submitted that there are triable issues in the suit. Let the impugned order be set aside and the matter be remitted back to the High Court for decision on merit and all the contentions by the parties may be left open.

Signature Not Verifi5ed. Keeping in view the fair stand taken by learned Digitaly signed by KANCHAN CHOUHAN Date: 2025.10.18

12:09:10 IST counsel for the respondent, the appeal is allowed. The Reason:

impugned order dated 23.12.2024 passed by the High Court is set aside and that of the Single Bench dated

15.12.2023 is restored. The suit shall now be considered by the Court dealing with all the issues on merits.

6. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.

..........................J.

(RAJESH BINDAL)

..........................J.

(MANMOHAN) NEW DELHI;

October 14, 2025.

ITEM NO.37 COURT NO.16 SECTION III-B S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 8878/2025 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 23-12-2024 in FAO(OS) No. 23/2024 passed by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla]

SJVN LIMITED Petitioner(s)

VERSUS M/S PATEL GAMMON JOINT VENTURE Respondent(s) Date : 14-10-2025 This petition was called on for hearing today.

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN For Petitioner(s) M/S. Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas Aor, AOR Mr. Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General Mr. Omar Ahmad, Adv. Mr. Ishan Gaur, Adv.

Mr. Vikram Shah, Adv.

Mr. Ritik Kumar Rath, Adv. Mr. Siddhart Kothari, Adv. Mr. Vikash Kumar Jha, Adv.

For Respondent(s) Mr. Ritin Rai, Sr. Adv.

Mr. K. R. Sasiprabhu, AOR Mr. Aditya Swarup, Adv.

Mr. Hiten Sampat, Adv.

Mr. Vishnu Sharma A S, Adv.

Mr. Ribhav Pande, Adv.

Ms. Namrata Saraogi, Adv.

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following

O R D E R

1. Leave granted.

2. The appeal is allowed, in terms of the signed order, which is placed on the file.

3. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top