Back
2021 Supreme(SC) 1183
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
NAVIN SINHA, KRISHNA MURARI, JJ.
Modern School, Sector 17, Faridabad - Appellant
Versus
Haryana Urban Development Authority & Ors. - Respondents
Civil Appeal No(S). 7158 of 2009 With C.A. No. 7159 of 2009, C.A. No. 7161 of 2009, C.A. No. 7160 of 2009, C.A. No. 7162 of 2009
Decided On : 25-02-2021
For the Appellant : Mr. Ajay Jain, Adv., Mr. Jinendra Jain, AOR, Ms. Mitika, Adv., Ms. Tannu, Adv., Mr. Puneet Mittal, Sr. Adv., Mr. Ashok K. Mahajan, AOR, Mr. Arvind Kumar Gupta, Adv., Mr. Prashant Bhardwaj, Adv., Mr. Rishi Bharadwaj, Adv., Mr. Abhiesumat Gupta, Adv., Mr. Anando Mukherjee, AOR, Ms. Shobha Gupta, AOR, Ms. Bina Madhavan, Adv., Ms. Soujanya Ketharaj, Adv., M/S. Lawyer S. Knit & Co, AOR.
For the Respondent: Mr. Alok Sangwan, Sr. AAG., Mr. Sumit Kumar Sharma, Adv., Dr. Monika Gusain, AOR, Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh Adv., Mr. Shantwanu Singh, Adv., Mr. Abhishek Paruthi, Adv., Ms. Pragaya Singh, Adv.
IMPORTANT POINT
The court refrained from making observations on the merits to avoid prejudice and found that the appellants were not differently situated from the petitioners in a previous case, leading to the impugned order being set aside and the matter being remanded to the High Court for fresh consideration.
Headnote:
Court Order - Refrain from Observing on Merits - Set Aside Impugned Order
Fact of the Case:
The court refrained from observing on the merits of the case to avoid prejudice, and found that the appellants were not differently situated from the petitioners in a previous case, leading to the impugned order being set aside and the matter remanded to the High Court for fresh consideration.
Finding of the Court:
The court refrained from making observations on the merits to avoid prejudice, found that the appellants were not differently situated from the petitioners in a previous case, and set aside the impugned order, remanding the matter to the High Court for fresh consideration.
Issues: Prejudice, Differently Situated Parties, Impugned Order, Remand to High Court
Ratio Decidendi: The court refrained from making observations on the merits to avoid prejudice and found that the appellants were not differently situated from the petitioners in a previous case, leading to the impugned order being set aside and the matter being remanded to the High Court for fresh consideration.
Final Decision: The impugned order was set aside, and the matter was remanded to the High Court for fresh consideration.
ORDER :
1. We have heard learned counsel for the parties at length.
2. In nature of the order proposed to be passed, we are purposefully refraining from observing anything on merits so as to not prejudice either party.
3. Nothing has been pointed out by the respondents, to our satisfaction, that the appellants are in any way differently situated from the petitioners in CWP No.11416 of 2007 allowed on 24.02.2009. The same Division Bench disposed of the present matters, on the same day, wherein similar questions appear to have been involved including facts, taking divergent views.
4. Therefore, we are satisfied, that on this short ground alone, the impugned order is not sustainable and is set aside. The matter is remanded to the High Court for fresh consideration and disposal in accordance with law. Till the matters are disposed, the interim orders passed by this Court on 02.04.2009 shall continue.
5. The appeals are disposed of in above terms.
