Cross-objection for enhanced compensation must be independently decided on merits, even after dismissal of the main appeal.

A respondent's cross-objection seeking enhancement of compensation survives dismissal of the main appeals and must be decided independently on its own merits under Order 41 Rule 22(4) CPC. The court must separately examine whether the evidence supports enhancement by reference to the statutory parameters governing market value under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. A summary rejection without discussion or reasons is not legally sustainable. The cross-objection was therefore required to be heard afresh on merits, and the matter was remanded to the High Court for that purpose.

---

---

Issues: Whether a cross-objection seeking enhancement of compensation can be dismissed without independent consideration and reasons merely because the main appeals have been dismissed.

Analysis: A respondent's cross-objection under Order 41 Rule 22(4) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 is maintainable and survives even where the original appeals are dismissed. The cross-objection must be heard and determined on its own merits, and the court must separately examine whether the evidence justifies enhancement of compensation with reference to the statutory parameters governing market value under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. A bare disposal of the cross-objection without discussion or reasons is not legally sustainable.

Conclusion: The cross-objection could not have been rejected summarily and had to be decided independently on merits. The appellants succeeded, and the matter was remanded to the High Court for fresh decision of the cross-objection in accordance with law.

---