Madhya Pradesh High Court
M/S Rajkamal Builders Through Its ... vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 14 February, 2025
Author: Anand Pathak
Bench: Anand Pathak, Hirdesh
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANAND PATHAK
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE HIRDESH
ON THE 14th OF FEBRUARY, 2025
WRIT APPEAL NO. 2970 of 2024
M/S RAJKAMAL BUILDERS THROUGH ITS PARTNERS
Vs.
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ANR.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
APPEARANCE:
Shri Anand Bhardwaj - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Vivek Khedkar - Additional Advocate General for the
respondents/State.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JUDGMENT
Per: Justice Anand Pathak
1. Heard on I.A.No.12316 of 2024, an application seeking permission
to file the present writ appeal.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the order which is
assailed by the appellant is passed against respondent No.2 (Ram
Kumar Sharma) from whom, the appellant has purchased the
property and since appellant is a subsequent purchaser of the
property in dispute, therefore, its valuable right is involved in the
matter. Thus, prayed for permission to file the present appeal.
3. On due consideration and looking to the contents of application, the
same is allowed. Appellant is permitted to file the present appeal.
4. Further heard on I.A.No.12315 of 2024, an application for
condonation of delay.
5. According to Office note, this appeal is barred by 30 days but from
the contents of application it appears that learned Writ Court passed
the order on 07-08-2024 but the said order was uploaded on website
on 22-10-2024, therefore, there appears no delay on part of
appellant. Accordingly, the application is allowed. Delay in
preferring the present appeal is hereby condoned and the present
writ appeal is heard on admission.
6. The present appeal under Section 2 (1) of the Madhya Pradesh
Uchcha Nyayalaya (Khand Nyaypeeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005
is preferred by the appellant (subsequent purchaser of the property)
being crestfallen by the order dated 07-08-2024 (uploaded on 22-
10-2024) passed by learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.2289
of 2024 whereby the writ petition filed by the petitioner/respondent
No.1/State has been allowed.
7. This is the appeal preferred by the appellant who has purchased the
property in question from respondent No.2. Before learned Writ
Court, respondent No.2 preferred petition under Article 226 of the
Constitution seeking following reliefs:
"(i) That, the impugned order dated 18.09.2020
(Annexure P/1) may kindly be set aside and quashed.
(ii) That, other relief which is just and proper in the
facts and circumstances of the case may also be'
granted."
8. It is the submission of learned counsel for the appellant that while
passing the order impugned by learned Writ Court, appellant has not
been heard and findings have been recorded against him. It is
further submitted that the order passed by learned Writ Court
amounts to nullification of judgment and decree dated 17-12-2021
passed in favour of appellant. According to learned counsel for the
appellant, learned Writ Court did not consider the controversy in
correct perspective and failed to consider the effect of judgment and
decree dated 17-12-2021 passed in favour of appellant and passed
the order impugned. Thus, prayed for setting aside the impugned
order.
9. Learned counsel for respondent No.1/ State while supporting the
order passed by learned Writ Court, opposed the prayer and submits
that since Nazool NOC was granted illegally, therefore, same was
taken under suo motu revision by the Additional Collector and
cancelled the said NOC but in revision, the said order was set aside,
therefore, in writ petition preferred by the State, the said order was
set aside. Respondent No.2 was heard by learned Writ Court,
therefore, the appellant who is subsequent purchaser has no right of
agitation before this Court particularly when the writ appeal filed
by respondent No.2 has also been dismissed. Thus, prayed for
dismissal of this appeal.
10. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
11. This is a case where appellant is taking exception to the order dated
07-08-2024 (uploaded on 22-10-2024) passed by learned Writ Court
in Writ Petition No.2289 of 2024. Learned Writ Court considering
the case preferred by the petitioner/respondent No.1, allowed the
petition filed by the State and quashed the order dated 18-09-2020
passed by Commissioner, Gwalior Division, Gwalior in case
No.1/Revision/2019-20.
12. On close scrutiny, it appears that earlier respondent No.2 also filed
writ appeal bearing No.2582 of 2024 arising out of order dated 07-
08-2024 passed in Writ Petition No.2289 of 2024 by learned Writ
Court whereby the writ petition filed by the petitioner/State was
allowed. On perusal of the order dated 19-11-2024 passed in the
said writ appeal, it appears that this Court considering all the facts
situation and legal position, dismissed the writ appeal filed by Ram
Kumar Sharma (respondent No.2 herein).
13. Objection of Government Advocate appears to be just and proper
that present writ appeal is being preferred by the appellant who is
subsequent purchaser.
14. At this stage, counsel for the appellant seeks withdrawal of this
appeal and seeks liberty to agitate the issue in litigation preferred by
the parties including First Appeal No.1108/2022 filed at the instance
of Municipal Corporation, Gwalior and First Appeal No.1510/2024
filed by State Government which are pending consideration.
15. Prayer noted.
16. Present appeal stands dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty as
aforesaid.
(ANAND PATHAK) (HIRDESH)
Anil* JUDGE JUDGE
ANIL KUMAR
CHAURASIYA
2025.02.18
19:46:40
+05'30'
