Exclusion of the jurisdiction of the Civil Court must be explicitly expressed or clearly implied, and if the offending action is alleged to be mala fide and in transgression of the authority, the suit would not be barred by section 42 of the Act.

Headnote:
section 42 - Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971 - 42, 37, 40, 41
Fact of the Case:

The appellants filed a suit seeking reliefs related to the allotment of land for slum rehabilitation. The trial Court returned the plaint, citing section 42 of the Act of 1971, which bars the jurisdiction of the Civil Court in certain matters.
Finding of the Court:

The Court found that the trial Court's decision to return the plaint based on section 42 was inappropriate and that the plaint should be examined on its merits. The Court set aside the impugned order and restored the plaint to the trial Court for further consideration.
Issues: The main issue was whether the trial Court was justified in returning the plaint based on section 42 of the Act of 1971.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that if the offending action is alleged to be mala fide and in transgression of the authority, the suit would not be barred by section 42 of the Act. The Court emphasized that the exclusion of the jurisdiction of the Civil Court must be explicitly expressed or clearly implied.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, and the plaint was restored to the trial Court for further consideration.

JUDGMENT - A.M. KHANWILKAR, J.:---This appeal takes exception to the order passed by the Bombay City Civil Court, Bombay dated March 29, 2001 in L.C. Suit No. 7567 of 2000.

2. The only question that arises for consideration in the present appeal is whether the trial Court was justified in returning the plaint as presented by the appellants plaintiffs on the ground that the same was barred by section 42 of the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act of 1971").

3. Briefly stated, the appellants herein filed a suit before the Bombay City Civil Court at Bombay. Appellant No. 1 claims to be the Chief Promoter of appellant No. 11 Co-operative Society, whereas appellant Nos. 2 to 10 claim to be the promoters of the said society.

4. The appellants seek to espouse the cause of about 350 hutment dwellers who were residing in land bearing City Survey No. 1582, Vile Parle (West), Andheri, Mumbai, till recently upto May 13, 2000. The said land admeasures about 21015. 70 square mtrs. It is not in dispute that the said land is owned by the respondent Corporation. According to the appellants, by virtue of the provisions of the Act of 1971, they were entitled for allotment of the subject- land for redevelopment and for constructing tenements thereon which could be occupied by them. The plaint as filed proceeds on the assertion that the plaintiffs made several representations to the concerned authorities in this behalf but their requests was turned down without indicating any reason whatsoever. According to the appellant, to their utter surprise, the authorities instead allotted the said land to respondent Nos. 5, 6 and 7 and 8 for development who, in turn, took unilateal action in demolishing the structures, namely, the hutments occupied by the members of the appellant society.

5. According to the appellants, on enquiries, it further revealed that the concerned authorities colluded with the said respondent and permitted them to develop the land by dispossessing the appellants members of the society. In this background, the appellants have filed the suit before the trial Court for the following reliefs.

"(a) It be declared by this Hon'ble Court that the Commissioner Report of defendant No. 1 at Exhibit N colly dated 20th July, 1996 is illegal, bad in law and is liable to be set aside.

(b) It be declared that the plaintiffs No. 11 society is the rightful claimant to the plot of land situate at C.T.S. No. 1582, Near Milan Sub-Way, Lohia Nagar, Vile Parle (West), Mumbai 400 050 area admeasuring about 21015.70 sq. mtrs. for slum rehabilitation projects, as per resolution passed on Item No. 51 by the Improvements Committee on 17th January, 1996.

(c) For mandatory order directing defendants Nos. 2, 3, 4 to allot the said plot of land C.T.S. No. 1582, Near Milan Sub-Way, Lohiya Nagar, Vile Parle (West) Andheri, Mumbai 400 050 admeasuring area 21015.70 sq. mtrs. to the plaintiff No. 11 society for Slum Rehabilitation in lieu of their structures in Slum declared by defendant No. 9.

(d) Defendant Nos. 5 to 8 and their servants and agents or any person or persons claiming through or under them be restrained by permanent order and injunction of this Hon'ble Court from entering upon and/or carrying on any construction on the said plot of land situated at C.T.S. No. 1582, Near Milan, Sub-Way, Lohiya Nagar, Vile Parle (West), Mumbai, 400 056, admeasuring area 21015.70 sq. mtrs.

(e) An order to be issued by this Hon'ble Court directing defendant No. 2 to 4 to produce files and papers before the Honourable Court in respect of Annexure 11 issued to defendant No. 8 and after perusing the same defendant No. 3 be directed to make detailed Enquiry into the circumstances in which it came to be granted.

(f) By order of mandatory injunction defendant Nos. 1 to 4 be directed to evict defendant Nos. 5 to 8 from the plot of land situate at C.T.S. No. 1582, Near Milan, Sub-Way, Lohiya Nagar, Vile Parle (West),

Click Here to Read the rest of this document