TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2008 (3) TMI 724
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ers of various tracts of lands situated in the town of Vadodara. 10,807 sq. meters of land in survey Nos. 345, 347/1 and 267 in Mazalapur were declared as surplus land under the provisions of the Urban Land Ceiling Act, 1976 (for short "the Act") by the competent authority. An appeal preferred thereagainst was dismissed by an Order dated 4.1.1988 by the appellate authority, stating; "As discussed above, no contention of the appellant is acceptable and there is no reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the Competent Authority and therefore the following order is passed. The appeal of the appellant is dismissed. The impugned order dated 12/07/1984 passed by the competent authority is confirmed. The in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d 2001 in the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Vadodara being Civil Suit No. 935 of 1999 and 190 of 2001 seeking injunction against the State from taking possession of the lands. The application for interim injunction was, however, dismissed. In the said interim order, allegedly a finding was recorded that the appellant had suppressed material facts and misled the Court. 6. However, in the year 1999, the Act was repealed. On the basis thereof purported statement was made by the Assistant Government Pleader in Special Civil Application No. 100 of 1996 withdrawing the said SCA No. 100 of 1996. The High Court in its Order dated 15.6.1999 recorded; "Mr. Dave, Ld. Counsel for the petitioner states that in view of the Urban Land....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ddha P. Mayee, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant urged that the High Court committed a serious error in passing the impugned judgments, by reason whereof not only 2205 days delay has been condoned, but a litigation is sought to be revived which would end in futility having regard to the conduct of the State and the subsequent events which took after 15.6.1999. 11. Ms. Madhvi Divan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent on the other hand, urged that the appellant had committed a fraud on the Court as it had suppressed the appellate order dated 4.1.1988 while preferring another appeal after 11 years of the passing of the original order dated 12.7.1984. At no stage, the learned counsel would submit,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the authorities of the State have made a complete goof up with the situation. By its action, it allowed subsequent events to happen, viz. sales of the lands have taken up, constructions have come up, but the question which arises for our consideration is as to whether even in such a situation, this Court would allow a suppression of fact to prevail. It is now a well settled principle that fraud vitiates all solemn acts. If an order is obtained by reason of commission of fraud, even the principles of natural justice are not required to be complied with for setting aside the same. In T. Vijendradas and Another Vs. M. Subramanian & Others [2007 (12) SCALE 1], this Court held; "21. When a fraud is practiced on ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fficient to deprive the allottees from their legal right to hold the said land. 16. An extra-ordinary situation of this nature would require an extra- ordinary order. 17. In the matter of passing an order of condonation of delay, we may notice that the Court of Appeal in Smith Vs. Kvaerner Cementation Foundations Ltd (Bar Council intervening) [2006 3 All ER 593] condoned the delay on the ground that the appellant therein had a human right to get his lis adjudicated before an independent and impartial tribunal and as the Judge was biased, delay in preferring the appeal was condoned stating; "41. The first criterion to be considered, (a), is the interests of the administration of justice. These would normally militate strongly ....