CompelledToLearnLaw (Financial Examiner) 11 March 2015

Chances of getting a stay on the proceedings of hma 13

Learned members, an application of HMA 24 has been filed in the proceedings of HMA 13. If HMA 24 is dismissed or has an unfavourable outcome for the applicant, can the applicant get a stay order on the proceedings of HMA 13 by appealing the lower court’s decision in the High Court? What are the chances of the applicant getting a stay on the proceedings of HMA 13? Applicable High Court is Punjab and Haryana High Court.

I pray to everyone that only the members who have genuine knowledge on the subject would answer. Thanks in advance for sharing ur knowledge.

Reply Follow

4 Replies

CompelledToLearnLaw (Financial Examiner) 11 March 2015

I learned that no appeal lies against the decision of HMA 24. It’s considered an interim order and the appeals against interim orders are barred by HMA 28(2). A review or a writ petition can be filed instead. A revision under CPC 115 is also barred by CPC 115(C).

Adv. Chandrasekhar (Advocate) 11 March 2015

Refer to P.T. Laxman Kumar Vs. Bhavani (II-2013 DMC 632 Mad.) The various facets have been discussed thoroughly.

1 Like

CompelledToLearnLaw (Financial Examiner) 12 March 2015

Thanks Adv. Chandrasekhar ji. An excellent judgment and it's well explained.

It’s just that the concerned case is in the District Court in front of a District Judge. So the family Court Act will not apply I guess. But the judgment is still relevant as it does not view the order of HMA 24 as an interlocutory order.

CompelledToLearnLaw (Financial Examiner) 12 March 2015

HMA 28(2):2) (2) Orders made by the Court in any proceedings under this Act, under Section 25 or Section 26 shall, subject to the provisions of sub-section (3), be appealable if they are not interim orders......

Does anyone know if, in the above section, the lawmakers meant to address any proceeding under this Act? Or did they just want to address section 25 and section 26? Some laws r written as if they r written in an extreme hurry.

If they only meant to address section 25, and 26, why couldn't they've written more clearly? For example:

Orders made by the court in the proceedings of section 25 of this Act, and section 26 of this Act, shall....

If they meant to address all proceedings under the Act, then, why did they bother to mention sections 25 and 26?