The bench said that the High Court should not proceed with the case for next two weeks.
The Supreme Court today sought response of former Janata Dal (United) president Sharad Yadav on a plea by Nitish Kumar led faction, which seeks to place on record the documents related to claim the formation of new party by Mr Yadav.
The top court also restrained the Delhi High Court from proceeding with the case for two weeks.
A bench of Justices A K Sikri and Ashok Bhushan issued notice to Yadav on the petition of leader of JD(U) in the Upper House, Ram Chandra Prasad Singh, and sought his reply in two weeks.
Senior advocate Ranjit Kumar, appearing for Mr Singh, said the high court should be directed to adjourn the matter till the adjudication of the present petition before the apex court.
The bench said that the High Court should not proceed with the case for next two weeks.
Mr Singh had challenged the September 11 Delhi High Court order by which it had dismissed his application seeking permission to place on record, additional documents to demonstrate the post-disqualification conduct of Mr Yadav.
Mr Singh had said in his application before the High Court that during the pendency of petition of Mr Yadav, challenging the order of Rajya Sabha chairman disqualifying him as an Member of Parliament, had launched/formed a new party called "Loktantrik Janata Dal" on May 18 this year.
He wanted to place on record video recordings of the speeches delivered by Mr Yadav, along with his photographs taken at the event.
The High Court, while dismissing the application of Mr Singh said that the scope of the petition before it is limited to examining the legality and the validity of the order dated December 4, 2017, passed by the Rajya Sabha Chairperson, disqualifying Mr Yadav from being a member of the Upper House of Parliament.
Mr Yadav had joined hands with the opposition after JD(U) president and Bihar chief minister Nitish Kumar dumped the alliance with the Rastriya Janata Dal and the Congress in Bihar and tied up with the BJP in July last year.
The Court had earlier observed that Mr Yadav may have to refund the salary drawn by him during the pendency of his petition challenging his disqualification as a Rajya Sabha member, if he was not successful in his plea.
The Court in December last year, while refusing to grant an interim stay on Mr Yadav's disqualification, had allowed him to draw his salary, allowances, perks and retain the bungalow.
The same order was later passed by the court on a similar plea moved by Mr Yadav's colleague and MP, Ali Anwar, both of whom were disqualified from the Upper House by December 4, 2017 by the RS chairman.
Mr Yadav has challenged his disqualification before the high court on several grounds, including that he was not given any chance to present his views by the Rajya Sabha chairman before he passed the order.
On the other hand, Ram Chandra Prasad Singh had sought disqualification of Mr Yadav and Mr Anwar on the ground that they had attended a rally of opposition parties in Patna in violation of party directives.
Mr Yadav was elected to the Rajya Sabha last year and his term is scheduled to end in July 2022. Mr Anwar's term was to expire this year. Both were disqualified under the Anti-Defection Act.