MUNICIPAL BOARD, SUMERPUR versus KUNDANMAL & ORS.

Citation: [2017] 5 S.C.R. 468 · Decided: 21-04-2017 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: R.K. AGRAWAL · Disposal: Case Partly allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
D 
[2017] 5 S.C.R. 468 
MUNICIPAL BOARD, SUMERPUR 
v. 
KUNDANMAL & ORS. 
(Civil Appeal No. 460 of2008) 
APRIL 21, 20 1 7 
[R. K. AGRAWAL AND ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE, JJ.) 
Supreme Court- Directions -Appellant-Municipal Board filed 
writ petition against respondents challenging order passed by the 
Collector - Single Judge of High Court dismissed the writ petition 
in limine -Appeal before Division Bench was also dismissed in limine 
- On appeal, held: Both writ Court and the Appellate Court did not 
even set out the factual controversy nor dealt with the submissions 
urged by the appellant nor examined the issues in the context of 
relevant provisions of the Act, which governed the controversy -
Therefore, issues cannot be examined in proper perspective by 
Supreme Court - Thus, matter remanded back to writ Court for 
deciding the writ petition on merits in accordance with law. 
Partly allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1. In order to appreciate the factual and legal 
E 
controversy involved in the /is, the least which is expected of is 
that the order which decides the /is between the parties should 
contain the brief facts involved in the case, the grounds on which 
the action is impugned, the stand of the parties defending the 
F 
G 
H 
action, the submissions of the parties in support of their stand, 
legal provisions, if any, applicable to the controversy involved in 
the /is, and lastly, the brief reasons as to why the case of one 
party deserves acceptance or rejection, as the case may be. This 
enables the superior Court to examine the legality of the decision 
in its proper perspective in its appellate jurisdiction. [Paras 9, 
10) [471-B-D] 
2. The writ Court should have issued notice of the writ 
petition to the respondents and then decided the writ petition on 
merits by reasoned order rather than to dismiss it in limine. [Para 
11) [471-E] 
468 
MUNICIPAL BOARD, SUMERPUR v. KUNDANMAL & ORS. 
469 
3. The Appellate Court too while dismissing the appeal in 
A 
/imine did not deal with any of the submissions raised by the 
appellant and nor assigned any reason much.less in detail thereby 
depriving the Appellate Court to examine the issues arising in 
the case in its proper perspective. [Para 121 (471-E-F] 
4. It is for these reasons, the conclusion arrived at by the 
B 
two Courts below is not satisfactory and it is proper in the facts 
of this case to remand it to the writ Court for deciding the writ 
petition on merits in accordance with law. The need to remand 
the case to the writ Court has occasioned due to the reason that 
both, i.e., the writ Court and the Appellate Court did not set out 
even the factual controversy nor dealt with the submissions urged 
C 
by the appellant and nor examined the issues in the context of 
relevant provisions of the Act which governed the controversy. 
[Paras 8, 13) [471-A-B, F-G] 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 460 of 
2008. 
D 
From the Judgment and Order dated 09.03.2006 of the High Court 
ofRajasthan at Jodhpur in D. B. Civil Special Appeal No. 92 of2006 . 
.. 
Puneet Jain, Abhinav Gupta, Ms. Chhaya K., Ms. Pratibha Jain, 
Advs. for the Appellant. 
E 
Varinder Kumar Sharma, Ms. Parul Sharma, Advs. for the 
Respondents. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE, J. 1. This appeal is filed against 
F 
the final judgment and order dated 09.03.2006 passed by the High Court· 
of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jodhpur in D.B. Civil Special Appeal No. 
92 of2006 whereby the High Court dismissed the special appeal filed by 
the appellant herein and affirmed the judgment/order dated 02.08.2005 
of the Single Judge in S.B.C.W.P. No.1403 of2004. 
2. Facts oftlie case need not be mentioned in detail except to the 
G 
extent necessary for the disposal of this appeal. 
3. The appellant - a Municipal Board, Sumerpur (writ petitioner) 
filed a writ petition being Civil Writ No. 1403 of 2004 against the 
H 
470 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2017] 5 S.C.R. 
A 
respondents challenging therein the order dated 30.09.2003 passed by 
the Collector, Pali in Municipal Appeal No.03/200 I. The Single Judge of 
the High Court dismissed the writ petition in limine by order dated 
02.08.2005 which reads as under: 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
"Heard learned counsel for the parties. 
The order impugned, Annex.8 has been passed in 
compliance of the order passed by Division Bench of this 
Court dated 15.1.2001 passed inter-parties being Annex.7. 
It is not shown, as to h
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.