The Deputy Commissioner vs Murarilal Agarwal
2022 Latest Caselaw 1366 Kant

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 1366 Kant
Judgement Date : 31 January, 2022

Karnataka High Court

The Deputy Commissioner vs Murarilal Agarwal on 31 January, 2022

Bench: S G Pandit, Anant Ramanath Hegde

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
                    DHARWAD BENCH

        DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JANUARY 2022

                         PRESENT

           THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G. PANDIT
                           AND
     THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

                W.A. NO.101458/2016 (LR)
BETWEEN:

1.     THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
       BALLARI DISTRICT, BALLARI.

2.     THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
       BALLARI SUB-DIVISION, BALLARI.

                                        -     APPELLANTS

(BY SRI.SHIVAPRABHU.S.HIREMATH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     MURARILAL AGARWAL
       S/O A.P. AGARWAL
       AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
       NO.899A, 899B and 900
       HARAGINADONI ROAD
       VENIVEERAPURA CROSS
       KUDITHINI VILLAGE
       BALLARI-585104.

2.     THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
       KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA
       DEVELOPMENT BOARD, M.S. BUILDING
       BENGALURU.

3.     THE ARCELOR MITTAL LTD.,
       COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE
                              2



      COMPANIES ACT HAVING ITS
      REGISTERED OFFICE AT
      UPPAL PLAZA, M6, 6TH FLOOR
      JASOLA DISTRICT CENTRE
      NEW DELHI-110025.
                                        -      RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.D.R.RAVISHANKAR, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
SRI.SRINAND PACHAPURE., ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI P.N.HATTI., ADVOCATE FOR R2;
NOTICE TO R3 IS SERVED)

     THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/SEC.4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961 PRAYING TO SET-ASIDE
THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN
W.P.NO.78519/2013 DATED 02.08.2014 & ETC.

     THIS WRIT APPEAL COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY, ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE J.,
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

                       JUDGMENT

Respondent No.1 in this appeal, who is the petitioner

in W.P.No.78519/2013 had purchased 9 different

agricultural lands under 9 different sale deeds. 8 sale

deeds were registered on 14.01.2007 and one sale deed

was registered on 20.8.2008. The Deputy Commissioner

and Assistant Commissioner, Ballari felt that there are

enough reasons to scrutinize the transaction on suspected

violation of Section 80 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act

(hereinafter referred as 'the Act'). In terms of order dated

18.12.2012, all transactions referred above were declared

as null and void on account of violation of Section 80 of the

Act. This order was under challenge before this Court in

W.P.No.78519/2013. The learned Single Judge of this

Court referring to several judgments rendered under

Section 79A and 79B of the Act came to the conclusion

that the action initiated by the State is belated and

accordingly allowed the writ petition and quashed the

order passed by the 2nd respondent-Assistant

Commissioner. Learned Single Judge is of the view that the

sale deeds were registered in the year 2007-2008 and

action was initiated in the year 2012, as such, the action

initiated is not within the reasonable period and vitiated by

delay and latches. This order of the learned Single Judge is

questioned in the writ petition.

2. Subsequent development namely amendment

to the Act in terms of Karnataka Ordinance No.23 of 2020

has got a bearing on the outcome of this appeal. In terms

of said amendment, Section 79A, 79B and 79C are omitted

and Section 80 is amended by way of substitution. And

certain clauses in Section 80 are omitted and certain

clauses are substituted. The said ordinance also provides

for savings of certain actions initiated under Sections 79A,

79B and 79C of the Act. At the same time, Sub-Section 2

of Section 12 of amendment ordinance provides for

abatement of pending cases.

Sections 12 and 13 of the Karnataka Ordinance No.23 of

2020 reads as under;

12. Savings.- (1) Notwithstanding the omission of section 79A, 79B and 79C with effect from 1st day of March 1974, all cases finally disposed off before the promulgation of the Karnataka Land Reforms (Amendment) Ordinance, 2020 (Karnataka Ordinance 13 of 2020) shall remain unaffected by the said Ordinance.

(2) All cases pending before any Court, tribunal or other authority competent under the provisions of the principal Act on the date of promulgation of the Karnataka Land Reforms (Amendment) Ordinance, 2020

(Karnataka Ordinance 13 of 2020) pertaining to sections 79A, 79B and 79C shall hereby stand abated.

13. Repeal and Savings.- (1) The Karnataka Land Reforms (Amendment) Ordinance, 2020 (Karnataka Ordinance 13 of 2020) is hereby repealed.

(2) Notwithstanding such repeal, anything done or any action taken under the principal Act, as amended by the said Ordinance, shall be deemed to have been done or taken under principal Act, as amended by this Ordinance.

3. Reading of sub-Section 2 of Section 12

referred above makes it clear that, all cases pending

before any Court, Tribunal or other authority competent

under the provisions of the principal Act on the date of

promulgation of the Karnataka Land Reforms

(Amendment) Ordinance, 2020 (Karnataka Ordinance 13

of 2020) pertaining to sections 79A, 79B and 79C shall

hereby stand abated. The word 'any Court' used in

aforementioned provision also includes High Court and

there is no reason to exclude the High Court from the

expression 'any Court' referred in the above said Section.

Under these circumstances, the present appeal filed by the