Facts: Appellants were landowners whose land was acquired by the State for the Respondent for public purpose under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. A compensation of Rs. 3,87,383 per bigha was awarded to the Appellants against which they preferred an appeal before the Civil Court. The Civil Court increased the compensation to Rs. 5,00,000 per bigha. Respondents filed an appeal to the High Court while the Appellants filed a cross objection under Order XLI, Rule 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 seeking enhancement of compensation. The High Court dismissed the Respondents’ appeal and as a consequence, dismissed the cross objection as well. Appellants were in appeal in the Supreme Court against this dismissal.

Issue: Whether the High Court was justified in dismissing the Appellant’s cross objection by virtue of having dismissed the appeal.

View: One remedy against any order available to an aggrieved party was by way of an appeal and the other was to file a cross objection. In this case, the aggrieved landowners took recourse to the second remedy of filing the cross objection. The High Court had dismissed the appeals filed by the Respondents, but in doing so was still required to examine whether a case was made out by the landowners, in their cross objection, for enhancement of compensation. Order XLI, Rule 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 provides that where, in any case in which any Respondent has filed a memorandum of objection under that rule and the original appeal is withdrawn or dismissed for default, the objection filed may nevertheless be heard and determined. Merely because the High Court dismissed the appeals filed by the Respondents on merits by itself would not result in dismissal of the Appellant’s cross objection also.

Held: The cross objection had to be disposed of on its merits notwithstanding the reasoned dismissal of the appeal filed by the Respondents. Impugned order of the High Court was set aside and High Court was asked to reconsider the cross objection  on merits. ( CANos . 5557-5559 of 2019 ( Arising out of SLP ( C ) Nos . 5793 -5795 of 2019 dt 16 -7 -2-2019) 

Editorial: The Court’s judgement clarifies an important aspect of procedural law in civil appeals and cross objections. An Appellate Court has to conduct independent inquiries in appeal and separately in cross objection when deciding appeals and cross objections in the same matter. The cross objection of the Respondent do not stand summarily rejected on dismissal of appeal of the appellant.

“We want education by which character is formed, strength of mind is increased, the intellect is expanded and by which one can stand on one’s feet.”