The SC has declared its 2022 verdict in the Noida land case as a ‘nullity’, after finding it was obtained through deliberate deception. Fraudulently secured compensation now stands cancelled.
New Delhi: Today, on July 23, the Supreme Court of India has cancelled its earlier order passed in May 2022 regarding compensation for land in Gautam Budh Nagar, Uttar Pradesh.
The land was acquired by the Noida Authority and is now a part of the busy commercial area in Sector 18, Noida. The apex court stated that the earlier decision had been obtained through fraud and must be erased from the record as it holds no legal value.
ALSO READ: India vs Pakistan War 2025: How India Constitutionally Declares War – Explained!
A bench consisting of Justices Surya Kant, Ujjal Bhuyan, and Dipankar Datta was hearing the dispute concerning a piece of land that was originally bought in 1997 by three individuals – Reddy Veerana, Vishnu Vardhan, and T Sudhakar.
In 2005, the Noida Authority acquired the land. Years later, Reddy Veerana allegedly approached different courts and falsely claimed to be the sole owner of the land.
This included his appeal to the Supreme Court in 2022, where he managed to secure an order for increased compensation.
However, Vishnu Vardhan challenged Veerana’s actions. He claimed that Veerana had deliberately removed him and Sudhakar from the ownership claim and had taken the compensation for himself.
Vardhan then initiated several legal proceedings and filed an application to recall the Supreme Court’s 2022 order.
Justice Dipankar Datta, who wrote the judgment for the bench, said that Veerana had misused the judicial system and secured compensation through fraud.
The bench made it clear that such fraudulent actions cannot be allowed to stand in the eyes of the law. The court remarked,
“Fraud and justice cannot dwell together.”
The judgment firmly held that when fraud is proven, legal protection cannot be granted, and even the final decision of a court can be withdrawn. Justice Datta wrote,
“The legislature never intends to guard fraud, the question of limitation to exercise power does not arise, if fraud is proved, and even finality of litigation cannot be pressed into service to absurd limits when a fraud is unravelled.”
The Supreme Court declared that even if Vishnu Vardhan had not asked for a review, the 2022 verdict in Veerana’s favour would still be invalid because it was obtained through deception.
The court stated,
“However, even if Vishnu had not applied for a review – as a logical corollary of the aforesaid discussions – the decision in Reddy Veerana (2022 verdict) too having been obtained by Reddy by playing fraud, has to be erased from the records being a nullity.”
The bench also overturned the Allahabad High Court’s order dated October 28, 2021, which had accepted Veerana’s claim as the sole landowner and increased the compensation from Rs 152.04 per square metre to Rs 1,10,000 per square metre.
The apex court observed that the entire process was tainted by fraud and therefore had no legal standing.
The bench remarked,
“As a logical corollary of the impugned order being set aside, it would follow that the decision of this Court in Reddy Veerana (2022 verdict), upholding the same, which too was obtained by playing fraud, will also be a nullity, and thus stand recalled in exercise of our inherent powers.”
Referring to a 1994 judgment by the Supreme Court, the bench explained the nature of fraud, saying it is,
“an act of deliberate deception with the design of securing something by taking unfair advantage of another: a deception in order to gain by another’s loss.”
The court also reflected on the broader implications of the case. It noted that while courts must rely on evidence and legal principles, they cannot ignore misuse of public funds or fraudulent manipulation of the judicial process.
The court said,
“We begin with recording the realisation that undoubtedly, there seems to be much more than what has met our eyes. However, like all courts, we are bound to decide cases based on the evidence on record, judicially noticeable facts, and the applicable law. Despite Reddy and Vishnu – and to a certain extent Sudhakar – having used the judicial process obviously to secure their personal interests, we cannot be a bystander.”
Emphasising the need to protect public interest and uphold justice, the bench remarked,
“If things have happened with a telling effect on public interest, resulting in public funds from the public exchequer being drained, the same has to be dealt with within the bounds of our jurisdiction. In our pursuit for the truth and to uphold the rule of law, we must adhere to established principles unless a valid reason warrants deviation.”
Finally, the Supreme Court sent the case back to the Allahabad High Court for fresh consideration. It also directed the High Court to make Vishnu Vardhan and T Sudhakar part of the proceedings as additional parties.
Case Title:
Vishnu Vardhan @ Vishnu Pradhan vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.
(Civil Appeal No. 7777/2023; W.P. (C) No. 673/2023; MA No. 1737/2023 in MA 255/2023 in C.A. No. 3636/2022)
Click Here to Read More Reports on Land Compensation
