Suppression of material facts can justify reopening final proceedings despite delay, with equities left for later judicial balancing.

Suppression of a material fact and fraud on the court can justify reopening proceedings despite substantial delay. The Court stated that where a prior appellate order was concealed and the matter had otherwise reached finality, later steps such as possession or allotment did not prevent recall and revival of the proceedings. It further held that delay objections could not shield an order procured by suppression, although the High Court may still balance equities between the parties while examining the merits. The challenge to reopening was rejected, and interference under Article 136 was declined.

---

---

Issues: Whether suppression of a material fact and alleged fraud on the Court justified condonation of the inordinate delay in seeking recall and revival of the proceedings.

Analysis: The proceedings had reached finality under the urban land ceiling regime, with surplus declaration, dismissal of the earlier appeal, and subsequent steps including possession and allotment. The Court held that suppression of the prior appellate order and the consequent attempt to reopen the matter could not be overlooked merely because later events had occurred. It reiterated that fraud vitiates judicial acts and that an order obtained by suppression may be revisited notwithstanding objections based on delay, while equities between the parties could still be adjusted by the High Court.

Conclusion: The delay and recall were rightly entertained and the challenge to the reopening of the matter was rejected.

Final Conclusion: The Court declined to interfere under Article 136 and upheld the revival of the proceedings, leaving the merits and equities to be considered by the High Court.

Ratio Decidendi: Suppression of a material fact and fraud on the Court can justify reopening of proceedings despite substantial delay, and equitable considerations may be balanced without permitting the fraud to defeat adjudication on merits.

---