SHIVAPPA BHIMAPPA Vs. NAGAPPA BHIMAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is directed against the preliminary finding recorded by the Munsiff, Savanur in O.S.No. 69 of 1976.

(2.) Respondent filed a suit for declaration that the occupancy rights granted by the Tribunal in respect of a portion of land Sy. No.3312 of Tallihalli village is arbitrary, illegal and: ultra vires cf the power of the Land Tribunal. One of the issues set down for consideration in that suit was whether the civil court has jurisdiction to entertain the suit and grant the relief prayed for. The learned Munsiff in art elaborate judgment, has held that he has jurisdiction to entertain the suit not withstanding the bar contained in S. 132 (2) of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act. He was of the opinion that the Tribunal's order not made in, accordance with the prescribed rules could be challenged bp-fore the civil court.

(3.) S. 132 (2) is as plain as it could be. It imposes an express bar on the civil court or the criminal court to examine the legality of the order of the Tribunal. That express bar cannot be circumvented by employing a device that the order of the. Tribunal was outside the prescribed rules in contravention of the rules. The order made in contravention of the rules of procedure is none the less an order of the Tribunal which gets the protection1 from S. 132 (2) and it shall not be questioned in any civil or criminal court. That protection of course is available only in regard to matters which fall within the exclusive jurisdicton of the Land Tribunal and to no others . The case on hand does not pertain to a matter falling outside the jurisdiction of the Tribunal.