Case Note & Summary
The present appeals arise from a long-standing property dispute concerning land known as 'Asman Jahi Paigah' in Raidurg village. The original suit for partition was filed in 1953, and a preliminary decree was passed in 1959 based on a compromise. The suit was withdrawn against the State Government. In 2003, a final decree was passed in favour of the first respondent (assignee of decree holders) for land measuring about 84.30 guntas. The first respondent sought mutation of his name in revenue records, but the Tahsildar (appellant) did not comply. The first respondent filed a writ petition, which was disposed of in 2009 directing mutation. The Tahsildar did not appeal, and the order became final. The first respondent then filed a contempt petition in 2014, which was allowed by a Single Judge in 2017, imposing punishment on the Tahsildar. The Tahsildar appealed to a Division Bench, which in 2018 allowed the appeals, setting aside the contempt order on grounds of limitation and that the decree was not binding on the State. The first respondent's SLP against this judgment was dismissed by the Supreme Court in 2018. Thereafter, the first respondent filed review petitions before the High Court, which were allowed by another Division Bench in 2022, restoring the Single Judge's order. The Supreme Court held that the High Court's review order was unsustainable. The dismissal of the SLP by the Supreme Court confirmed the finality of the 2018 Division Bench judgment. The High Court, in review, could not re-examine the merits and set aside that judgment. The review petitions were an abuse of process. On merits, the Supreme Court agreed with the original Division Bench that the contempt petition was barred by limitation under Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, as the failure to mutate was a single act and not a continuing wrong. Further, since the suit was withdrawn against the State, the decree could not be enforced against the State for mutation. The Supreme Court allowed the appeals, set aside the impugned review order, and restored the 2018 Division Bench judgment.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Review Jurisdiction - Finality of Orders - After dismissal of SLP by Supreme Court, High Court cannot review its own judgment on merits - The review petitions were filed after the Supreme Court dismissed the special leave petitions against the original Division Bench judgment. The High Court, in review, could not re-examine the merits and set aside the earlier judgment, as the dismissal of SLP confirmed the finality of that judgment. Held that the review order was without jurisdiction and an abuse of process (Paras 4-10). B) Contempt of Court - Limitation - Continuing Wrong - Failure to mutate revenue records is a single act, not a continuing wrong - The contempt petition was filed beyond one year from the date of the order directing mutation. The failure to mutate was a single act of disobedience, and the limitation period under Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 could not be circumvented by treating it as a continuing wrong. Held that the contempt petition was barred by limitation (Paras 11-15). C) Property Law - Mutation - Effect of Decree - Decree not binding on State where suit was withdrawn against State - The preliminary decree recorded that the suit was withdrawn against the State Government. Therefore, the final decree could not be enforced against the State for mutation of revenue records. The direction for mutation was held to be fraudulent and unsustainable. Held that the State was not bound by the decree (Paras 16-20).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court could entertain a review petition and set aside the earlier Division Bench judgment after the Supreme Court had dismissed the special leave petitions against that judgment, and whether the review order was sustainable on merits.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeals, set aside the impugned order of the High Court dated 27th April 2022, and restored the judgment and order dated 16th August 2018 passed by the Division Bench (original).
Law Points
- Review jurisdiction
- Finality of orders
- Contempt of court
- Continuing wrong
- Mutation of revenue records
- Res judicata
- Abuse of process of court
