Pramod Kumar Harishchandra Agrawal vs. The Collector Gondia & Others
AI Summary
The Supreme Court disposed of a Special Leave Petition filed by a petitioner appearing in person, directing the revenue authority to expeditiously hear an appeal already filed by the petitioner under the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code. This order streamlines the resolution of a land revenue dispute, ensuring that the existing appellate process is followed efficiently, offering a path for a swift resolution.
Case Identifiers
Petitioner's Counsel
eCourtsIndia AITM
Brief Facts Summary
Mr. Pramod Kumar Harishchandra Agrawal filed a Special Leave Petition (Civil) in the Supreme Court, challenging a final judgment and order of the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur dated November 29, 2013, related to WP No. 6083/2013. During the Supreme Court hearing on July 13, 2015, the petitioner-in-person submitted that he had already filed an appeal before the revenue authority under the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code concerning the same matter.
Timeline of Events
High Court of Bombay at Nagpur passes impugned final judgment and order in WP No. 6083/2013.
Petitioner files an appeal before the revenue authority under the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code.
Special Leave Petition (C) No. 36759/2014 registered in the Supreme Court.
Supreme Court hears the Special Leave Petition and disposes it with directions.
Key Factual Findings
The petitioner has already filed an appeal before the revenue authority under the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code after the High Court order.
Source: Recited from Petitioner Pleading
Primary Legal Issues
Secondary Legal Issues
Statutes Applied
Petitioner's Arguments
The petitioner, appearing in person, informed the Supreme Court that subsequent to the High Court's order, he had already filed an appeal before the revenue authority under the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, thereby pursuing an alternative statutory remedy.
Court's Reasoning
The Supreme Court decided to dispose of the Special Leave Petition based on the submission by the petitioner that an appeal was already pending before the revenue authority. The Court reasoned that since an alternative statutory remedy was being pursued, the more appropriate course of action was to direct the revenue authority to hear and dispose of that appeal expeditiously.
- Emphasis on proper procedural hierarchy and exhaustion of statutory remedies
- Commitment to expeditious justice through existing mechanisms
Impugned Orders
Specific Directions
- 1.The revenue authority, before whom the appeal, if any, is pending, is directed to hear and dispose of the appeal as expeditiously as possible.
Precedential Assessment
Persuasive (Procedural)
The order is procedural, disposing of the SLP based on the existence of an alternative statutory remedy being pursued. It reiterates the well-established principle of allowing statutory remedies to be exhausted and is not a substantive ruling on a novel point of law.
Tips for Legal Practice
Legal Tags
Disclaimer: eCourtsIndia (ECI) is not a lawyer and this analysis is generated by ECI AI, it might make mistakes. This is not a legal advice. Please consult with a qualified legal professional for matters requiring legal expertise.
Order Issued After Hearing
Purpose:
Case Registered
Listed On:
24 Dec 2014
Original Order Copy
Get a certified copy of this order
Order Text
ITEM NO.59 COURT NO.10 SECTION IX
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 36759/2014
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 29/11/2013 in WP No. 6083/2013 passed by the High Court Of Bombay At Nagpur)
MR. PRAMOD KUMAR HARISHCHANDRA AGRAWAL Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
THE COLLECTOR GONDIA & OTHERS Respondent(s)
(with appln. (s) for permission to appear and argue in person and interim relief and office report)
Date : 13/07/2015 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
Digitally signed by Sukhbir Paul Kaur Date: 2015.07.15 16:41:12 IST Reason:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.Y. EQBAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. NAGAPPAN
For Petitioner(s)
Petitioner-in-person
For Respondent(s)
UPON hearing the petitioner-in-person,the Court made the following O R D E R
The petitioner who is appearing in person, submits that after the order was passed by the High Court, he had already filed appeal before the revenue authority under the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code.
In that view of the matter, this special leave petition is disposed of with a direction to the revenue authority, before whom the appeal, if any, is pending to hear and dispose of the appeal as expeditiously as possible. Signature Not Verified
[INDU POKHRIYAL] [SUKHBIR PAUL KAUR] COURT MASTER A.R.-CUM-P.S.