Appeal – Dismissal of appeals by Division Bench “as not pressed” – Propriety of – On facts, intra court appeals before the Division Bench of the High Court against quashing of the acquisition proceedings by the Single Judge – Division Bench dismissed the appeals “as not pressed” and withdrawn – On appeal, held: Right of appeal is a valuable right of a litigant – He is entitled to prosecute this right as it enables him to seek adjudication of the issues on merits, which are subject matter of the appeal – However, such right can be forgone but has to be done with express authority and free will – On facts, no express prayer made by the Development Authority and nor it could be inferred from the document relied on at the instance of respondents for forming an opinion ‘not to press the appeal’ – Dismissal of appeal certainly deprived the Authority of their right to prosecute the appeals on merits – Furthermore, the Development Authority being a juristic entity created under the Act, they have to ensure strict compliance of the relevant provisions of the Act under which they are created along with the compliance of the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure for forgoing their right to prosecute the appeal on merits – Thus, the conclusion arrived at by the Division Bench set aside – High Court to decide the appeals on merits.
Subsequent Events – Relevance of – Held: Any act done by the parties in relation to the subject matter of the appeals after the impugned order, are of no relevance for deciding the present appeals and cannot be pressed into service to support the impugned order – Legality and correctness of the impugned order is to be examined in the light of reasoning contained in the impugned order and not on the basis of the acts done by the parties subsequent to the passing of impugned order.
Allowing the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1.1 On perusal of the resolution dated 02.07.2016, Government letter dated 26.06.2018 and the letter dated 14.11.2017 of the Commissioner and further keeping in view the relevant provisions of the Karnataka Act, the appeals filed by the Mysore Urban Development Authority could not have been dismissed “as not pressed”. In other words, the High Court should have dismissed the respondents’ application as being misconceived and decided the appeals on merits in accordance with law. [Para 26][147-G]
1.2 Neither there was any express prayer made by the Mysore Urban Development Authority (MUDA) and nor it could be inferred from the document relied on by the Division Bench at the instance of respondents (writ petitioners) for forming an opinion “not to press the appeal”. In other words, the opinion formed by the High Court for dismissing the appeals “as not pressed” had no basis. Such dismissal certainly deprived the MUDA of their right to prosecute the appeals on merits. [Para 27][148-A-B]
1.3 A right of appeal is a valuable right of a litigant. He is entitled to prosecute this right as it enables him to seek adjudication of the issues on merits, which are subject matter of the appeal by the Appellate Court. He can, however, forgo such right but it has to be done with express authority and free will. The respondents, however, cannot compel the appellant to give up the right of prosecuting the appeal unless the respondents are able to show any express provision in law in that behalf or valid reasons acceptable in law which deprive the appellant from prosecuting his grievance in appeal. [Para 28][148-C]
1.4 If the appellant is a juristic entity created under the Act, they have to ensure strict compliance of the relevant provisions of the Act under which they are created coupled with ensuring compliance of relevant provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure for forgoing their right to prosecute the appeal on merits. If, for some reasons, there are two rival groups in a juristic entity, one prays for withdrawal and the other insisting for hearing the appeal then it is the duty of the Court to first resolve this issue in the light of the relevant provisions of law and then proceed to decide the appeal accordingly. Similarly, when such prayer is made at the instance of the respondent and is opposed by the appellant, the same has to be dealt with strictly in accordance with law by the Appellate Court. [Paras 29, 30][148-D-F]
1.5 Any act done by the parties in relation to the subject matter of the appeals after the impugned order, cannot be pressed into service to support the impugned order. In other words, the legality and correctness of the impugned order has to be examined in the light of reasoning contained in the impugned order and not on the basis of the acts done by the parties subsequent to the passing of impugned order. It is for this reason the acts done by the party subsequent to passing of the impugned order are of no relevance for deciding the present appeals. [Para 32][148-G-H; 149-A]
1.6 The Division Bench should have decided the appeals on merits in accordance with law. The reasoning and the conclusion arrived at by the Division Bench in the impugned order are set aside. The writ appeals out of which these appeals arise are accordingly restored to their original numbers. The High Court is requested to decide the appeals on merits in accordance with law. [Paras 25, 33 and 34][147-F; 149-B]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.