Constitution of India – Art.136 – Maintainability of the second Special Leave Petition, when the first was withdrawn without liberty – Appellant defaulted in his obligation to repay loan to the respondent-Bank – Respondent classified the loan account as ‘Non-Performing Asset’ and initiated measures u/s.13(4) of the SARFAESI Act – Appellant filed writ petition, which was disposed of by the High Court requiring the appellant to pay Rs.2 crores by a stipulated date and the remaining amount in instalments – Appellant challenged this order in SLP before this Court and the SLP was dismissed as withdrawn – Appellant then filed a review petition in the High Court seeking review of the order passed by the High Court and the same was dismissed – Consequent thereupon, the appellant filed two civil appeals against the original High Court order and the order dismissing the review petition – Maintainability:
Held: It is not a permissible practice to challenge the same order over again after withdrawing the special leave petition without obtaining permission of the court for withdrawing it with liberty to move for special leave again subsequently – Nature of power exercisable by this Court u/Art.136, would apply in the first round when a judgment and order is challenged and not when the challenge to the same judgment and order is withdrawn in the first round and a second chance is attempted without having obtained the permission of the Court to re-approach it – Entertaining a special leave petition in a case of the present nature would be contrary to public policy and can even tantamount to sitting in appeal over the previous order of this Court which has attained finality – Maxim interest reipublicae ut sit finis litium (it is for the public good that there be an end to litigation) would apply in all fours when it is found that proceedings challenging an order were not carried forward by withdrawing the special leave petition and the litigant has returned to the same court after some time mounting a challenge to the self-same order which was earlier under challenge and such challenge had not been pursued – This is a course of action which cannot be justified either in principle or precept – Preliminary objections to the maintainability of the appeals upheld – Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 – s.13(4) – Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Ord.XLVII r.7(1). [Paras 26, 35]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Headnotes prepared by: Nidhi Jain. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.