Authority: Supreme Court of India
Order Date: 22-07-2026
Case Overview
- Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 24296/2026 filed by Kalpataru Retail Ventures Ltd against Assessing Officer Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd & Anr., arising from the impugned final judgment and order dated 09-07-2026 in WP No. 8455/2026 of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay.
- The petition sought permission to file additional documents, facts, and annexures (IA No. 204864/2026 and IA No. 204225/2026) and interim relief against the directions issued by the High Court.
- The matter was called for hearing on 22-07-2026 before a bench of Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Kumar and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva.
- Counsel for the petitioner included Senior Advocates Mukul Rohatgi, Sajan Poovayya, Mahesh Agarwal, among others; the respondent’s counsel details were not listed.
Order
- The Supreme Court granted the petition, allowing the filing of the additional documents and annexures sought.
- An issue notice was directed, to be returnable on 07.09.2026; the notice shall be served by all modes, including dasti.
- The Court stayed the operation of the directions contained in paragraph Nos. 4 and 5 of the High Court order dated 09.07.2026 until the next hearing.
- The High Court is instructed to take up the matter for consideration on 31.07.2026 regarding the prayer for interim relief.
- Until the High Court’s consideration is completed, no adverse measures shall be taken against the petitioner.
- The order was digitally signed by Deepak Guglani (Deputy Registrar Court Master, NSH) and Preeti Saxena.
Final Outcome
- The Supreme Court’s order permits Kalpataru Retail Ventures Ltd to supplement its SLP petition with additional documentation, stays the earlier High Court directives, sets a returnable notice date of 07‑09‑2026, and schedules further High Court consideration on 31‑07‑2026, while prohibiting any adverse action against the petitioner pending that consideration.
Topics: Legal Relief, Court Proceedings, Regulatory Dispute