KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
ANU SIVARAMAN, K.MANMADHA RAO, JJ
SYED MUNEER – Appellant
Versus
MUTHYALAPPA S. AND OTHERS – Respondent
Regular First Appeal No. 2300 of 2023 (SP)
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. hearing of appeals requires understanding of facts and context. (Para 1) |
| 2. arguments regarding the rejection of plaint and applicability of ptcl act. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 3. court's observation on the need for trial court evaluation. (Para 5) |
(PER: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN)
Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side.
2. The only question which requires our consideration in this appeal is whether rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 , ('CPC' for short)
was justifiable in the facts of this case.
3. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant places reliance on the judgments of this Court in RFA No.1766/2013 and contends that the very question whether an agreement for sale would be hit by the provisions of Sections 4 (1), 4(2) and 4(3) of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 ('PTCL Act' for short) is a question which has to be decided taking note of the facts and circumstances of individual cases and that rejection of plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of CPC was not justified. Learned counsel would also contend that the land in question is not a granted land at all.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents would, on the other hand, contend that the agreement itself had a clause with regard to obtaining of permission from the Government before sale deed is executed and that the appellant had no case before the trial Court that the land was not a granted land.
5. Having considered the contentions advanced, we are of the opinion that the question whether the provisions of Section 4 of the PTCL Act applies to the agreement in question is a matter which has to be considered by the trial Court and rejection of the plaint at the very inception under Order VII Rule 11 of CPC was not justified in the facts of this case.
6. In the above view of the matter, the order dated
04.09.2023 in O.S.No.1269/2022 of the trial Court is set aside. The matter is remanded to the trial Court for consideration of the question whether the PTCL Act would apply to the transaction in question. The trial Court shall take up the said issue as a preliminary issue and pass orders on the same after hearing the parties concerned, preferably, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.