Act(s) of a party after a court’s decision not to be considered during appeal : SC

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Mysore Urban Development Authority vs. K.M. Chikkathayamma & Ors. on 7th September 2018, pronounced that any act(s) done by a person which is/are subsequent to an impugned order cannot be pressed into service to support such an impugned order.

The Hon’ble Apex court observed that, the reasoning behind the judgement shall be relied upon  while examining its legality and correctness instead of the acts done by the parties which are subsequent to the passing of such an impugned order. In other words, if subsequent  to the passing of an order, a person does any act(s), then such act(s) shall be irrelevant while considering the legality and correctness of the order.  Moreover, the Hon’ble Apex court further enunciated that even while deciding an appeal such acts which are subsequent to the passing of an order shall not be given any value.

For better understanding, the following example shall be referred to:

For instance,

  • A case has been decided in favour of a person.
  • Subsequent to such a decision, the person does any investment or takes any other step.
  • Then if the opposite party goes into an appeal against such an order, such investment/any other step shall not be considered while deciding the appeal or while examining the correctness and legality of such decision.

The relevant paragraphs are reproduced below for perusal:

In our opinion, 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)

The appeals thus succeed and are accordingly allowed. Impugned order in both the matters 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. (Para 34)

We also make it clear that any step(s), if claimed to have been taken by the respondents (writ petitioners) subsequent to the impugned order, the same would not, in any way, influence the High Court while deciding the appeals on merits.(Para 36)

The parties are at liberty to claim refund of their money, if they claimed to have paid/deposited with the appellant in relation to the subject matter of the appeals. (Para 37)

Copy of the judgement: Judgement 07-Sep-2018

-Tushar Kaushik

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *