Facts: In this case, a party withdrew proceedings before a competent court without obtaining leave to file a fresh proceeding.

Issue: Can a second special leave petition (SLP) be filed if the first SLP was dismissed without reasons or was withdrawn?

Observation: The Supreme Court, on July 29, expressed its disagreement with the notion that a fresh SLP can be filed after a previous SLP was dismissed by a non-speaking order or withdrawn. Citing Order XXIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the Court stated that a party cannot seek a "second bite at the cherry" without the court's leave after withdrawal. The Court clarified that while a non-speaking dismissal of an SLP does not invoke the doctrine of merger, once leave to appeal is granted, the order in the appeal is subject to that doctrine. Furthermore, the Court noted that a review of the dismissal before the High Court remains maintainable even after the SLP dismissal.