MUNIRAJU Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This case has a checkered history. On 06.11.1939, 2 acres 4 guntas of land in Sy.No.114 of Ramagondanhalli Village, Varthur Hobli, Bangalore East Taluk was granted by the subdivisional Officer to Sri Poojiga s/o Yellappa with a condition of non-alienation for a period of 20 years. However, Poojiga sold the granted land infavour of Govindappa s/o Nanjappa on 24.10.1951, before the completion of the non-alienation period. Thereafter the lands changed hands three times, the last of the transactions being on 17.11.1980, when it was purchased by Sri N.Ravikiran and Sri N.Kumar. Sri Poojiga filed an application before the Assistant Commissioner, invoking the provisions of Section 4 and 5 of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 (for short 'the PTCL Act'). By order dated 31.12.1983, the Assistant Commissioner allowed the application while holding that the first sale transaction dated 24.10.1951 was in contravention of the conditions of grant and therefore the said transaction and all subsequent transactions are void. It is contended that the land was restored, physically to Poojiga on 11.09.1985. Sri Poojiga died in the year 1988.

(2.) The purchasers i.e., Sri N.Kumar and Sri N.Ravikiran preferred an appeal before the Deputy Commissioner and the appeal was dismissed on 02.02.1998. Not being satisfied, the purchasers approached this Court in W.P.No.18169/1998, which was dismissed on 11.08.1999 and the writ appeal filed by the purchasers in W.A.No.6649/1999 was also dismissed as withdrawn, on 23.10.2000. In the meanwhile, Smt Narasamma, the widow of Poojiga, who felt threatened by the interference caused by Sri N.Kumar and Sri N.Ravikiran, filed O.S.No.46/1992 seeking a decree of permanent injunction. The suit was decreed and therefore Sri N.Kumar and Sri N.Ravikiran preferred a Regular Appeal in R.A.No.63/1998. The Regular Appeal and thereafter Regular Second Appeal in R.S.A.No.761/2001 were also dismissed. The RSA was dismissed on 22.06.2007.

(3.) In the meanwhile, Sri N.Kumar and Sri N.Ravikiran, who had suffered the orders at the hands of the Assistant Commissioner and an adverse order in the original suit filed by Smt. Narasamma, filed O.S.No.193/1995 before the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Bangalore Rural District arraigning Smt.Narasamma, W/o Poojiga as the defendant, seeking a declaration that the endorsement dated 31.12.1983 issued by the Assistant Commissioner is null and void and sought for permanent injunction. It appears that during the pendency of the suit Smt. Narasamma passed away and therefore her daughter Smt. Venkatamma, her children Sri Venkatesh and Sri Muniraju were brought on record as the legal representatives of Smt.Narasamma. The said Sri Venkatesh and Sri Muniraju (the petitioner herein) filed an interlocutory application under Order VII Rule 11(d) of CPC r/w Section 5(2) of the PTCL Act seeking rejection of the plaint, on the ground that suit is barred by an express provision of the PTCL Act and the Civil Court has no jurisdiction to try the suit. When the application was rejected, Sri Venkatesh and the petitioner herein filed W.P.No.13523/2012. This Court by order dated 13.06.2012 allowed the writ petition and consequently I.A.No.19 was also allowed while holding that the Civil Court has no jurisdiction to try the suit in view of the specific bar provided under the PTCL Act. Sri N.Kumar and Sri N.Ravikiran had preferred an SLP calling in question the order passed in W.P.No.13523/2012 and on dismissal of the SLP, they had filed a review petition in R.P.No.41/2013. Nevertheless the review petition was also dismissed by order dated 17.10.2014.