Article 136 interference against refusal of interim mandatory possession requires jurisdictional error, illegality, perversity, or grave infirmity.

Interference under Article 136 was declined against a discretionary refusal of interim mandatory possession under Section 12A of the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, because the order disclosed no jurisdictional error, patent illegality, perversity, or other grave infirmity. The Commission's view that the matter was ready for final disposal, that the applicants remained protected against cancellation of allotment, and that no irreparable loss would follow was treated as a proper basis for refusing interim possession. A prior similar request had also been rejected, and no acceptable without-prejudice offer for the disputed extra charges had been made.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Court should interfere under Article 136 with the Commission's refusal to grant interim possession of the flats under Section 12A of the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act.

Analysis: The relief sought was an interim mandatory direction to deliver possession before the enquiry was concluded. The Commission had declined such relief on the ground that the matter was ripe for final disposal, that the applicants were already protected against cancellation of allotment, and that no irreparable loss would result from refusing interim possession. The Court found no jurisdictional error, patent illegality, perversity, or irrelevant reasoning in that view. It also noted that a substantially similar request had earlier been rejected and that no acceptable offer for payment of the disputed extra charges on a without-prejudice basis had been made before the Commission or in the special leave petition.

Conclusion: The refusal to grant interim possession was upheld and no interference was called for.

Final Conclusion: The interim relief proceedings failed, and the enquiry before the Commission was directed to continue expeditiously.

Ratio Decidendi: Interference under Article 136 is not warranted against a discretionary refusal of interim mandatory relief unless the order suffers from jurisdictional error, patent illegality, perversity, or similarly grave infirmity.

---