Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(KAR) 20390
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR, J
MR INDRAJIT PALYA LANKESH – Appellant
Versus
KARNATAKA ROAD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD – Respondent
WP 7370/2024
Important Points
Subject
Civil Law - Land Acquisition
Act Referred
Civil Procedure Code, 1908: Order 7 Rule 11
Headnote
(B) Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Order 7 Rule 11 - The application filed by the petitioner is pending for over two years, prompting the court to direct the trial court to expedite its disposal. (Paras 4-5)
Facts of the case:
The petition was filed by the defendant in a suit regarding acquisition proceedings, which was argued to be barred under Section 16(3) of the Act.
Findings of Court:
The court ruled that the trial court must dispose of the pending application under Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC promptly.
Issues: The main issues addressed were the jurisdiction of the Civil Court over the acquisition proceedings and the delay in the disposal of the application.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the suit was barred by the provisions of the Act, reaffirming the principle that the jurisdiction of the Civil Court is limited in matters related to land acquisition.
Result: The order dated 13.12.2021 is declared without jurisdiction and not maintainable.
SRI. V. LAKSHMINARAYANA, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SMT. ANUSHA L., ADVOCATE
DATED:13.12.2021 (ANNEXURE-AK IN THE OS NO. 526/2021 PASSED BY THE HONBLE PRL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC ANEKAL AND CONSEQUENTLY DECLARE THE SAID ORDER DATED:13.12.2021 IS WITHOUT JURISDICTION AND NOT MAINTAINABLE, VIOLATIVE OF SECTION 63 OF THE RIGHT TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND TRANSPARENCY IN LAND ACQUISITION REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT ACT 2013 AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
- ORDER This petition is preferred by the defendant No.1 in O.S.No.526/2021 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge, Junior Division, JMFC, Anekal.
2. Heard learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner and perused the material on record.
3. The order passed, notice to respondents is dispensed with.
4. In additional to reiterating the various contentions urged in the petition and referring to the material on record, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the suit filed by respondent No.3-plaintiff in relation to acquisition proceedings is expressly barred by the provision of the Section 16(3) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation, Resettlement Act, 2013, which ousts the jurisdiction of the Civil Court to entertain and adjudicate upon the matter. It is submitted that under these circumstances, an application filed under Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC has been filed by the petitioner which is pending for more than two years and in view of the delay in disposal of the application the petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition.
5. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and submissions made on behalf of the petitioner and in the light of the judgment of the Apex Court in High Court Bar Association Allahabad Vs The State of U.P & Others in Criminal Appeal No.3589/2023 dated 29.02.2023, I deem it just and appropriate to direct the trial Court to dispose of the application filed by the petitioner under Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC as expeditiously as possible.
