Interim order interference in GST TRAN-1 dispute declined where modification before the Single Judge remained available.

Appellate interference with an interim order concerning a GST TRAN-1 upload grievance was declined because the order contained no specific directions and no manifest error was shown. The Kerala HC noted that the appellants could place their factual distinction and prior verification materials before the Single Judge and seek modification of the interim order. As an effective remedy remained available before the court that passed the order, appellate correction was unwarranted. The interim order was left undisturbed, and the challenge failed, while the appellants were left at liberty to pursue modification before the Single Judge.

---

---

Issues: Whether the impugned interim order calling for consideration of the writ petitioners' grievance regarding uploading of FORM GST TRAN-1 required interference in appeal.

Analysis: The appeals arose from an interim order that contained no specific directions. The Court noted that the appellants were free to place their factual distinction and the materials regarding prior verification before the Single Judge and seek modification of the interim order. The Court found no basis to presume that such submissions would not be considered appropriately, and held that interference at the appellate stage was unwarranted.

Conclusion: The appeal was not entertained on merits and the impugned interim order was left undisturbed.

Final Conclusion: The appellate challenge to the interim order failed, while the appellants were left at liberty to pursue modification before the Single Judge.

Ratio Decidendi: Interference with an interim order is unwarranted where the party has an available opportunity to seek modification before the court that passed it and no manifest error requiring appellate correction is shown.

---