https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791832 Availability of an appellate remedy does not by itself bar supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227; interference remains open where a tribunal acts without or in excess of jurisdiction, fails to exercise jurisdiction, or acts perversely causing grave injustice. On that basis, the petition was maintainable. In contempt proceedings, the authority must confine itself to wilful disobedience of the operative order and cannot reopen the merits of the underlying dispute or grant substantive directions beyond that order. A direction affecting the pending interlocutory application and permitting completion of the sale process was therefore beyond contempt jurisdiction and was set aside, while subsequent sale-related steps were left to abide by the interlocutory application. en-us Mon, 11 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 19 May 2026 08:18:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791832 Availability of an appellate remedy does not by itself bar supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227; interference remains open where a tribunal acts without or in excess of jurisdiction, fails to exercise jurisdiction, or acts perversely causing grave injustice. On that basis, the petition was maintainable. In contempt proceedings, the authority must confine itself to wilful disobedience of the operative order and cannot reopen the merits of the underlying dispute or grant substantive directions beyond that order. A direction affecting the pending interlocutory application and permitting completion of the sale process was therefore beyond contempt jurisdiction and was set aside, while subsequent sale-related steps were left to abide by the interlocutory application. Case-Laws IBC Mon, 11 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791832