Case Details

  • Case Name: Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 16592‑16594/2026
  • Court/Authority: Supreme Court of India
  • Date of Order: 27‑05‑2026
  • Originating Orders: Impugned final judgment and order dated 05‑01‑2026 in MISCP No. 3672/2025, 05‑01‑2026 in MISCP No. 1446/2025, and 17‑02‑2026 in RP No. 219/2026 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Principal Seat at Jabalpur
  • Period of Dispute: Not specified in the order

Parties Involved

  • Petitioner: M/S Shyam Indus Power Solution Private Ltd.
  • Respondent: Madhya Pradesh Madhya Kshetra Vidyut Vitran Co. Ltd.
  • Petitioner’s Counsel: Mr. Pankaj Kumar Singh, Adv.; Mrs. Bimla Sharma, Adv.; Ms. Akshita Singh, Adv.; Mr. Seshatalpa Sai Bandaru, AOR
  • Respondent’s Counsel/AOR: Ms. Abiha Zaidi, AOR; Ms. Suriti Chowdhary, AOR; Mr. Pritam Raman Giriya, Adv.; Mr. Ashish Bainsla, Adv.
  • Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pamidighantam, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sri Narasimha, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Aradhe

Issues / Allegations / Violations

  • The petition challenges the final judgments and orders of the Madhya Pradesh High Court dated 05‑01‑2026 (MISCP Nos. 3672/2025 & 1446/2025) and 17‑02‑2026 (RP No. 219/2026).
  • Specific substantive issues or alleged violations are not detailed in the Supreme Court order; the filing is for special leave to appeal those judgments.

Findings & Observations

  • The Court, after hearing counsel, directed procedural steps rather than substantive adjudication of the merits.
  • No commentary on the merits of the underlying dispute was provided in the order.

Penalties / Settlements / Directions

  • Direction 1: Issue a notice to the petitioner, returnable on 13‑07‑2026.
  • Direction 2: Ms. Abiha Zaidi, authorized officer for the respondent, accepted the notice on caveat and waived service of a formal notice.

Corrective Actions & Future Obligations

  • The petitioner must respond to the notice by the stipulated return date of 13 July 2026.
  • The respondent has waived formal service, indicating acceptance of the procedural step and no further immediate action required from the respondent.

Final Ruling & Enforcement

  • The Supreme Court order is procedural, setting a timeline for notice issuance and return.
  • No substantive judgment on the merits of the special leave petition was rendered; the matter proceeds on the basis of the notice and subsequent responses.