Advocates appeared:
For the Parties : Mr. Sanjay Poddar, Sr. Adv. Ms. Qurratulain, AOR Mr. Anil Kumar Goyal, Adv. Mr. Govind Kumar, Adv. Mr. Pratish Goel, Adv. Mr. Vishnu B. Saharya, AOR Mr. Viresh B. Saharya, Adv. Mr. Akshat Agarwal, Adv. M/S. Saharya & Co., AOR Ms. Shalini Chandra, AOR Mr. Nitin Mishra, AOR Mr. Ishaan Sharma, Adv. Mr. Ravi Bharuka, AOR Mr. Ankit Agarwal, Adv. Ms. Sujeeta Srivastava, AOR Ms. Arti Singh, AOR Mr. Aakashdeep Singh Roda, Adv. Ms. Pooja Singh, Adv. Mr. B P Singh, Adv. Ms. Binu Tamta, Mr. Dinesh Kumar Garg, AOR Mr. Abhishek Garg, Adv. Mr. Dhananjay Garg, Adv. Mr. Ashwani Kumar, AOR Mr. Puneet Sharma, Adv. Mr. Anshay Dhatwalia, Adv. Ms. Niharika Ahluwalia, AOR Ms. Ishita Deswal, Adv. Mr. Arpit Sharma, Adv. Ms. Manika Tripathy, AOR Mr. Ashutosh Kaushik, Adv. Bhavana Moolchandani, Adv. Hitesh Kumar Sharma, Adv. S. K. Rajora, Adv. Akhileshwar Jha, Adv. Niharika Dewivedi, Adv. Amit Kumar Chawla, Adv. Narendra Pal Sharma, Adv. Mr. Rakesh Kumar, AOR Ms. Neelam Singh, AOR Mr. Sudeep Singh, Adv. Mr. Amit Malik, Adv. Mr. Akul Mahendru, Adv. Mr. Bhavya Sethi, Adv. Mr. Sameeer Singh, Adv. Mr. Rajiv Raheja, AOR Mr. Ravi Ranjan, Adv. Mr. T. N. Singh, AOR Mr. Vikas Kumar Singh, Adv. Ms. Rajshree Singh, Adv. Dr. Sham Chand, Adv. Mr. Vikram Singh, Adv. Ms. Diksha Rai, AOR Ms. Nina R Nariman, Adv. Mr. Ankit Agarwal, Adv. Ms. Ragini Pandey, Adv. Mr. Alok Gupta, AOR Mr. Abhishek Garg, Adv. Mr. Dhananjay Garg, AOR Mr. Ishaan Tiwari, Adv. Mr. R.P Bansal, Adv. Mr. R.jawaharal, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Bawa, Adv. Mr. Anuj Goel, Adv. Mr. Mohit, Adv. Mr. Mayank Kshirsagar, AOR Ms. Abha Goel, Adv. Mr. Ankur Bansal, AOR Mr. Davesh Bhatia, Adv. Mr. Shyam Divan, Sr. Adv. Ms. Akriti Chaubey, AOR Mr. Anirudh Bakru, Adv. Ms. Anshula Laroiya, Adv. Mr. Ayush Puri, Adv. Ms. Smita Maan, AOR Mr. Ajay Marwah, AOR Mr. Rajiv Ghawana, Adv. Mr. T. V. S. Raghavendra Sreyas, AOR Mr. Siddharth Vasudev, Adv. Mr. Divyanshu Goyal, AOR Mr. Mayank Kapoor, Adv. Ms. Divya Sharma, Adv. Ms. Jasmine Damkewala, AOR Mr. Abhinav Shrivastava, AOR Mr. Atul Kumar, AOR Ms. Sweety Singh, Adv. Ms. Archana Kumari, Adv. Mr. Rahul Pandey, Adv. Mr. AVS Kadyan, Adv. Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, Adv. Ms. Rachita Kadyan, Adv. Mr. Awdesh Kumar, Adv. Ms. Manika Tripathy, AOR Mr. Ashutosh Kaushik, Adv. Mr. Shubham Hasija, Adv. Mr. Dinesh Kumar Garg, AOR Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR Ms. Astha Tyagi, AOR Mr. Abhishekaran Roy, Adv. Mr. Nishit Agrawal, AOR Mr. Anuj Tyagi, Adv. Ms. Kanishka Mittal, Adv. Ms. Upasna Agrawal, Adv. Ms. Vanya Agrawal, Adv. Mr. Ashwani Kumar, AOR Mr. Nishit Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Anshay Dhatwalia, Adv. Ms. Shalini Chandra, AOR Mr. Ajay Vikram Singh, AOR Mrs. Priyanka Singh, Adv. Mr. Shubham Singh, Adv. Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Adv. Mr. Omkar, Adv. Mr. Sanjay Poddar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Shivam Goel, Adv. Mr. Anil Kumar Goyal, Adv. Mr. Govind Kumar, Adv. Mr. Ameet Siingh, Adv. Mr. Praveen Swarup, AOR Mr. B. V. Niren, Adv. Mr. Rakesh Kumar, AOR

Key Points: - Delay condoned and petitions were heard together; review/recall allowed in light of Indore Development Authority over Pune Municipal Corporation (Para references and order summary) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) . - Pune Municipal Corporation (2014) 3 SCC 183 overruled by Indore Development Authority v. Manoharlal (2020) 8 SCC 129; para 365 overruled Pune and related precedents; discussion on how this affects prior decisions (!) (!) (!) . - Explanation to Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC bars review merely on subsequent overruling by a larger bench; maintainability hinges on "any other sufficient reason" interpreted in light of para 365-366 and Beghar Foundation; scope narrowed to analogous grounds (Para discussions and p_27, p_34, p_35, p_39-46, p_47-48). - Court recalled/restored cases to merits under Indore Development Authority framework and directed fresh consideration on merits (Para 9, p_9; p_11–p_13). - Limited relief: extension of one year for fresh acquisition proceedings and retention of possession until then; otherwise possession to landowners if no fresh proceedings are initiated (P-105 to P-109; P-52 to P-54). - Observations on maintainability: some judges held review petitions impermissible under the Explanation to Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC; others endorsed limited recall in light of substantial legal change (P-29, p_45, p_48).

How to review and recall orders under Article 137 of the Constitution of India read with Section 47 CPC in light of Indore Development Authority v. Manoharlal?

What is the impact of the Indore Development Authority (Five-J Judge) decision overruling Pune Municipal Corporation on petitions seeking review of judgments relying on Pune Municipal Corporation?

What are the grounds for maintainability of review petitions under Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC and the effect of the Explanation to Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC in this context?