Case Details

  • Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 16178/2025, arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 23-04-2025 in CRP No. 1170/2020 passed by the High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad.
  • Supreme Court of India.
  • Hearing date: 22-05-2026.
  • No specific period of violation; the dispute concerns the High Court’s order rejecting the plaint.

Parties Involved

  • Petitioner: Guru Nanak Educational Society.
  • Respondent: A Venkat Narsimha Raju.
  • Lower Court: High Court for the State of Telangana (which issued the impugned judgment).
  • Counsel for Petitioner: Sr. Adv. Siddharta Dave, Sr. Adv. C S Vaidyanathan, AOR Md. Sadath Hussain, among others.
  • Counsel for Respondent: Sr. Adv. Mukul Rohatgi, Adv. Sughosh Subramanyam, Adv. Vipin Nair, and a team of senior advocates.

Issues / Allegations / Violations

  • The petition sought special leave to appeal the High Court’s order that allowed the Civil Revision Petition and rejected the plaint in the underlying suit.
  • The petitioner alleged that the High Court’s decision warranted interference, though specific grounds were not detailed in the record.

Findings & Observations

  • The Supreme Court, after hearing senior counsel for both sides, concluded that there was no good ground or reason to interfere with the High Court’s judgment.
  • The Court noted that the High Court had allowed the Civil Revision Petition and, by implication, the suit stood rejected, even though the impugned judgment did not explicitly state this.

Penalties / Settlements / Directions

  • No monetary penalties or settlements were imposed.
  • The special leave petitions were dismissed.
  • Any pending applications, if any, were ordered to stand disposed of.

Corrective Actions & Future Obligations

  • No specific corrective actions or future compliance obligations were directed beyond the dismissal of the petitions.

Final Ruling & Enforcement

  • The Supreme Court dismissed the special leave petitions, thereby upholding the High Court’s order that the plaint remains rejected.
  • The dismissal is final, and no further relief is granted to the petitioner.