RASOOL SHERIFF Vs. BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS first appeal arises from the judgment and decree dated 24-6-1996 passed by Sri A. Mohan Ram, XIV Additional City Civil Judge, bangalore, in O. S. No. 1762 of 1990 (Rasool Sheriff alias Basha v Bangalore Development Authority, by its Commissioner ). The plaintiff had claimed among others the following relief i. e. , to declare the preliminary notification No. BDA/salao/c4/pr (s) 131/7778, dated 19-9-1977 and final Notification No. HUD 3 MNJ 78, dated 7-2-1978 published in the karnataka Gazette, dated 9-3-1978 as null and void and not binding. The Trial Court dismissed the suit taking the suit to be not maintainable for the declaration of nullity sought against the notification of acquisition in view of the decision of their Lordships of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Bihar v Dhirendra Kumar and Others. The plaintiff having felt aggrieved from the dismissal of the suit has come up in appeal.

(2.) I have heard Sri Purushothama Rao, learned Counsel for the appellant and Sri N. K. Patil for the respondent.

(3.) THE learned Counsel for the appellant contended that when the notification, according to the plaintiff, is null and void ab initio, the Civil court can declare the document to be null and void. There is no specific bar against the Civil Court's jurisdiction to proceed with the suit.