<p>The Supreme Court on Monday stayed trial in the disproportionate assets case against Tamil Nadu Chief Minister J Jayalalitha in a Bangalore court.<br /><br /></p>.<p>Bench of Justices B S Chauhan and A K Sikri put the proceedings in abeyance till June 6 after she contended that the criminal case against her could not continue until the civil suit going on in the same court with regard to ownership of properties was not disposed of.<br /><br />The court admitted the special leave petition filed by Jayalalitha challenging the Karnataka High Court of May 21 and issued notice to the Tamil Nadu government and its vigilance department.<br /><br />Senior advocate Ranjit Kumar, appearing for the petitioner, contended that the special court in Bangalore had not complied with the direction of the Madras High Court of April 2, 2014 wherein it had asked the trial judge to make certain companies parties to the case and decide their claims over some properties before proceeding with the final arguments.<br /><br />He said that the special judge went ahead with the arguments without following the High Court’s order.<br /></p>
<p>The Supreme Court on Monday stayed trial in the disproportionate assets case against Tamil Nadu Chief Minister J Jayalalitha in a Bangalore court.<br /><br /></p>.<p>Bench of Justices B S Chauhan and A K Sikri put the proceedings in abeyance till June 6 after she contended that the criminal case against her could not continue until the civil suit going on in the same court with regard to ownership of properties was not disposed of.<br /><br />The court admitted the special leave petition filed by Jayalalitha challenging the Karnataka High Court of May 21 and issued notice to the Tamil Nadu government and its vigilance department.<br /><br />Senior advocate Ranjit Kumar, appearing for the petitioner, contended that the special court in Bangalore had not complied with the direction of the Madras High Court of April 2, 2014 wherein it had asked the trial judge to make certain companies parties to the case and decide their claims over some properties before proceeding with the final arguments.<br /><br />He said that the special judge went ahead with the arguments without following the High Court’s order.<br /></p>
