Supreme Court examines High Court's substitution of interim injunction order

The case concerns a dispute over the validity of share transfers and property transactions made by an elderly widow to her granddaughter and son-in-law, specifically challenging the High Court's decision to set aside an interim injunction that had frozen these assets.

Who it concerns: Appellants: Shruti Manav Sharma & Anr. (legal representatives of the deceased original plaintiff); Respondents: Sunanina Singh & Ors. (including the granddaughter and son-in-law); Bench: Justice Alok Aradhe.

What the court decided

• The Court is examining whether the High Court Division Bench was justified in substituting its own view for that of the Single Judge regarding the interim injunction.
• The Court is reviewing the limits of appellate interference under Order XLIII Rule 1(r) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Also in the document

• The original plaintiff died on 09.01.2025 during the pendency of the appeals.
• The High Court Division Bench had previously set aside the Single Judge's order granting the interim injunction on 20.03.2026.
• The Single Judge had found that the transfers were procured by undue influence and that the defendant companies were alter egos of the individual defendants.