https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456747 The SC ruled that appeals under Section 18 of the Terrorists and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987, were not maintainable, as the impugned order was interlocutory, not final. The court emphasized the distinction between interlocutory and final orders, affirming that the order did not conclusively adjudicate the parties' rights. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed, and claimants were advised to pursue civil suits for proper legal recourse. The court highlighted the importance of efficiency in Designated Courts and encouraged brevity in interlocutory matters. en-us Mon, 15 Jan 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 13 Aug 2024 11:02:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456747 The SC ruled that appeals under Section 18 of the Terrorists and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987, were not maintainable, as the impugned order was interlocutory, not final. The court emphasized the distinction between interlocutory and final orders, affirming that the order did not conclusively adjudicate the parties' rights. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed, and claimants were advised to pursue civil suits for proper legal recourse. The court highlighted the importance of efficiency in Designated Courts and encouraged brevity in interlocutory matters. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 15 Jan 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456747