Bench: Supreme Court of India
Issue:
Whether the Division Bench of the High Court was justified in allowing the appeal filed by the Plaintiffs and decreeing the suit.
Facts:
1. The suit property went through several transfers between different parties from a period of 1933 to 1962.
2. At last it was surrendered to the state of west Bengal who gave it to Apollo Gleneagles Hospitals for a lease of 30 years.
3. After years of slumber the original owner, filed a writ petition and claimed ownership over the land.
4. The single judge of Calcutta High Court allowed the petition which was then challenged by the respondent before the division bench of the high court.
5. The division bench allowed the appeal and set aside the order of the single bench.
6. Left aggrieved by the decision of the Division bench, a special leave petition was filed by another respondent in Supreme Court which was dismissed by the said court. And the petitioner was asked to adopt for a remedy under the act or any other law.
7. As a consequence, Respondent Nos. 1 to 7 filed Civil Suit out of which the present appeals arise. The suit was filed against the present Appellants, i.e., the Competent Authority under the Act, the State of West Bengal, and Respondent Nos. 8 and 9 in the Court of Additional District Judge, Sealdah.
8. The Civil Suit was filed for declaration and possession of the suit property.
Appellants Contention
The Plaintiffs claimed a declaration that the entire proceedings which culminated in the issuance of the notification dated 12.02.1990 under the Act in relation to the suit property be declared null and void and the plaintiffs be declared owners of the suit property.
Respondents Contention
The respondents contented that the Civil Suit filed by the Plaintiffs was barred by limitation, because the Plaintiffs had slept over their alleged right of ownership over the suit property by not availing of remedies under the Act.
Final Decision
Supreme Court considered the view that the jurisdiction of the Civil Courts to try the civil Suits with respect to the lands, which were subjected to ceiling proceedings under the Act, are held to be impliedly barred, since the Act excludes the jurisdiction of the Civil Court.
Hence, the appeals succeed and are allowed. The impugned judgments are set aside and the judgment of the Trial Court is restored.
Para 77, Competent Authority Calcutta, vs. David Mantosh and Ors. On 26 February, 2019
Click here to register
