Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE
Gajendra Singh
State of Madhya Pradesh – Appellant
Versus
Ayodhya Bai – Respondent
ORDER :
Gajendra Singh, J.
This Civil Revision under Section 115 of the CPC is preferred challenging the legality of the order dated 07.07.2023 in RCSA/95/2017 passed by 6th Civil Judge Junior Division, Ujjain, whereby the application filed by the petitioners/defendants under Order 7 Rule 11 of the CPC (Annexure-A-2) has been rejected.
2. The facts in brief are that the respondent/plaintiff filed Civil Suit No. RCSA No.95/17 before the learned 4" Civil Judge, Class-IInd, Ujjain for the relief of declaration of title and permanent injunction in respect of the suit land bearing survey no. 136/2 area 0.836, 139/2/1 area 0.784, 147/2/1 area 1.431, 151/1 area 0.967, 222/3/2 area 0.136, 223/1/2 area 1.296, 228/1 area 0.794, 229/1/1 area 0.554, 327/ area 0.021, 380/1 area 0.021, 381/1 area 0.315, 382 area 0.125, 383 area 0.042 hectare total Survey No.13 area 7.042 hectare situated at village Ninamwasa Tehsil and Distt. Ujjain. The suit land was under Urban Ceiling therefore proceedings under Urban Ceiling Act were initiated against the original Bhumi Swami of the land namely Ayodhya bai and others. That as per the plaint allegation the present respondents were cultivating the said land in
Civil courts are barred from hearing suits related to land under Urban Ceiling proceedings, emphasizing the need for utilizing statutory remedies instead.
Inordinate delay in filing a writ petition can bar the consideration of merits, especially when prior proceedings have reached finality.
The court held that disputed questions of title and possession cannot be resolved in a writ petition, and the petitioners were entitled to remain in possession of the land despite ULC proceedings.
The court established that proceedings under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act abate if possession is not taken before the Repeal Act, but claims can be dismissed on grounds of delay.
Failure to issue mandatory notices under the Urban Land Act invalidates state claims of land possession, allowing petitioners to retain ownership rights based on ongoing lawful occupancy.
Mandatory compliance with statutory notice requirements is essential for valid proceedings under land regulation laws; non-compliance renders actions void and proceedings abated upon repeal.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
