As per case facts, a land parcel in New Delhi, initially reserved for a High School, was de-reserved due to insufficient area. The original coloniser sold this land, leading to ... civil suits where courts affirmed the owners' possession and title against the Municipal Corporation, which attained finality. Subsequent purchasers (appellants) sought to incorporate their plots into the colony's layout plan, but the Corporation rejected their applications, asserting custody. A Single Judge directed reconsideration, but the Division Bench reversed this, raising doubts about the appellants' title and the land's public purpose.The question arose whether the Division Bench was justified in unsettling the civil court's final decree on ownership and possession by delving into title and public purpose, when the appeal's scope was confined to reconsidering the layout plan incorporation application.Finally, the Supreme Court ruled that the Division Bench erred by questioning the final civil court decree. It confirmed that title was not at issue before the High Court and deemed the Division Bench's observations on public purpose and doubtful title perverse. The Court restored the Single Judge's order, directing the Corporation to objectively reconsider the appellants' layout plan application within sixty days, without prejudice from any title-related observations.