Case Name: Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No. 14046/2026
Parties: M/S ANONDITA HEALTHCARE & ANR (Petitioner) vs FAIZ MOHAMMAD & ORS (Respondent)
Court/Authority: Supreme Court of India
Date of Hearing: 25‑05‑2026
Origin: Impugned final judgment and order dated 24‑01‑2026 in SBCRP No.12/2023 and SBCRP No.273/2022 of High Court of Rajasthan, Jaipur
Parties Involved
Petitioner: M/S ANONDITA HEALTHCARE & ANR
Respondent: FAIZ MOHAMMAD & ORS
Counsel for Petitioner: Sr. Adv. Vikas Singh, Adv. K Raghavacharyulu, Adv. Rahul Singh, AOR Nishant Shokeen, Adv. Sumita Singh, Adv. Yash Bhardwaj, Adv. Dhruv Dwivedi, Adv. Ojaswani Dixit, Sr. Adv. P B Suresh, Adv. Parth Yadav, Adv. Mani Munjal
Counsel for Respondent: Same senior counsel team as listed
Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra, Hon’ble Mr. Justice N.V. Anjaria
Issues / Allegations / Violations
Petitioner contends that the decree for injunction is executable under Order XXI Rule 32 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, contrary to the High Court’s view that it is not executable.
The dispute involves attachment of two machines, with an attachment order dated 07‑08‑2021, which petitioner seeks to challenge.
Multiple interim applications were filed: IA No.128043/2026 (condonation of delay), IA No.128044/2026 (exemption from filing C/C), IA No.128047/2026 (exemption from filing O.T.), IA No.128046/2026 (permission to file additional documents), and related applications IA No.154883‑154887/2026.
Findings & Observations
The Court condoned the delay in filing the interim applications.
The Court noted the petitioner’s submission regarding the executability of the injunction decree under Order XXI Rule 32 CPC and indicated the High Court may have taken an erroneous view.
The Court directed that a notice be issued, returnable within six weeks.
Penalties / Settlements / Directions
No monetary penalty was imposed.
The Court directed that the status‑quo regarding the attached machines be maintained and that the attachment order dated 07‑08‑2021 shall continue to be in effect.
Corrective Actions & Future Obligations
The parties must comply with the notice to be issued within six weeks.
The status‑quo on the attached machines must be observed until further orders.
The petitioner may seek further relief based on the notice and the Court’s observation on the executability of the decree.
Final Ruling & Enforcement
Delay in filing interim applications was condoned.
Notice to be issued, returnable in six weeks.
Status‑quo on the attached machines upheld; attachment order of 07‑08‑2021 remains operative.
Separate criminal SLP No. 9401/2026 was listed for hearing on 27‑05‑2026.
