M.P. HOUSING BOARD & ANR. versus SATISH KUMAR BATRA AND ORS

M.P. HOUSING BOARD & ANR. versus SATISH KUMAR BATRA AND ORS

The Division Bench erred by allowing Writ Appeal No.392 of 2009 without noticing Writ Appeal No.447 of 2009 filed by the predecessor-in-title which challenged the same acquisition and notifications under Sections 4 and 6; therefore the impugned judgment is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Division Bench of the High Court to decide Writ Appeal No.392 of 2009 along with Writ Appeal No.447 of 2009.

Parties
Appellant: M.P. Housing Board & Anr.; Respondent: Satish Kumar Batra and Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
10 February 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / On Appeal From Division Bench Judgment and Order Dated 18.09.2020 of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in Writ Appeal No.392 of 2009
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; impugned judgment and order dated 18.09.2020 of the High Court set aside and matter remanded to the Division Bench of the High Court to decide Writ Appeal No.392 of 2009 along with Writ Appeal No.447 of 2009.
Legal Topics
Sections 4 and 6 Notification Challenge, Objections Under Section 5 a, Limitation and Laches, Consolidation of Appeals, Remand
Land Acquisition Civil Procedure Judicial Review Sections 4 and 6 Notification Challenge Objections Under Section 5 a Limitation and Laches Consolidation of Appeals Remand

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M.P. Housing Board & Anr.

Appellant

Satish Kumar Batra and Ors.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / On Appeal From Division Bench Judgment and Order Dated 18.09.2020 of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in Writ Appeal No.392 of 2009

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Division Bench erred in deciding Writ Appeal No.392 of 2009 without noticing the pending Writ Appeal No.447 of 2009 filed by the predecessor-in-title challenging the same acquisition and notifications under Sections 4 and 6
  2. 2 Whether appeals concerning the same acquisition and notifications should be heard together to avoid conflicting orders
  3. 3 Whether the Division Bench's order should be set aside and the matter remanded for joint disposal of the appeals

Ratio Decidendi

The Division Bench erred by allowing Writ Appeal No.392 of 2009 without noticing Writ Appeal No.447 of 2009 filed by the predecessor-in-title which challenged the same acquisition and notifications under Sections 4 and 6; therefore the impugned judgment is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Division Bench of the High Court to decide Writ Appeal No.392 of 2009 along with Writ Appeal No.447 of 2009.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; impugned judgment and order dated 18.09.2020 of the High Court set aside and matter remanded to the Division Bench of the High Court to decide Writ Appeal No.392 of 2009 along with Writ Appeal No.447 of 2009.

Orders

  • Impugned judgment and order dated 18.09.2020 set aside
  • Matter remanded to the Division Bench of the High Court to decide Writ Appeal No.392 of 2009 along with Writ Appeal No.447 of 2009 on merits