https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450282 The SC held that interim stay orders granted by HCs cannot be automatically vacated after six months through judicial direction. The Court ruled that Article 142 jurisdiction cannot be exercised to issue blanket directions for automatic vacation of stays or mandate day-to-day disposal within fixed timeframes. Such directions would violate substantive rights of litigants not party to proceedings and contravene natural justice principles. The SC emphasized that Article 142 powers must ensure complete justice between parties without nullifying benefits of validly passed judicial orders affecting non-parties. Constitutional Courts should avoid fixing time-bound schedules for case disposal except in exceptional circumstances, leaving prioritization to concerned Courts. en-us Thu, 29 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 09 Aug 2024 16:37:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450282 The SC held that interim stay orders granted by HCs cannot be automatically vacated after six months through judicial direction. The Court ruled that Article 142 jurisdiction cannot be exercised to issue blanket directions for automatic vacation of stays or mandate day-to-day disposal within fixed timeframes. Such directions would violate substantive rights of litigants not party to proceedings and contravene natural justice principles. The SC emphasized that Article 142 powers must ensure complete justice between parties without nullifying benefits of validly passed judicial orders affecting non-parties. Constitutional Courts should avoid fixing time-bound schedules for case disposal except in exceptional circumstances, leaving prioritization to concerned Courts. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 29 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450282