Supervisory interference with an interim status quo order was refused after both sides were heard and objections considered.

Supervisory interference was declined where the interim order staying the arbitral award and granting temporary injunction had been passed after hearing both sides and considering the objections. The court found no procedural infirmity or jurisdictional error, noting that the order was only intended to preserve the existing position until the regular court decided the matter. The writ petition therefore failed, and the interim arrangement remained undisturbed.

---

---

Issues: Whether interference was warranted with the interim order staying the arbitral award and granting temporary injunction in the pending proceedings.

Analysis: The pleadings and materials showed that the petitioner had been heard before the concerned Court, objections had been filed, and the impugned order was passed after considering the rival contentions. The order under challenge was interim in nature and was intended to preserve the existing position until the regular Court decided the matter. In these circumstances, no procedural infirmity or jurisdictional error was made out for supervisory interference.

Conclusion: Interference with the interim order was declined.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition failed, and the interim arrangement made by the concerned Court was left undisturbed.

Ratio Decidendi: Supervisory interference is not warranted against an interim order passed after hearing both sides and on consideration of objections, especially where the order is meant to preserve status quo pending adjudication.

---