In Brief
Two land grabbing cases filed by the same parties regarding overlapping portions of the same property resulted in conflicting outcomes—one dismissed and one allowed. The Supreme Court held that both cases should have been jointly decided under joinder of causes rules (CPC Order II Rule 3) to prevent conflicting decisions on identical facts. Additionally, State authorities were unequally impleaded and the High Court exceeded its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 by re-appreciating evidence as an appellate court. The Court set aside both the High Court and Special Court judgments and remanded both cases for de novo disposal as consolidated cases, permitting amendment of pleadings and additional evidence, with no opinion expressed on merits."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.