Karnataka High Court
Gadigeppa S/O Erappa Totad vs Omkarappa S/O Sanabasappa ... on 4 January, 2022
Bench: Sachin Shankar Magadum
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
RSA NO.6128/2010 (DEC/INJ)
C/W RSA NOS.6127, 6129 AND 6138 OF 2010
IN RSA NO.6128/2010
BETWEEN
GADIGEPPA S/O ERAPPA TOTAD,
AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE,
R/O TIMMENHALLI,TALUK: RANEBENNUR,DISTRICT: HAVERI.
... APPELLANT
(BY SRI.AVINASH BANAKAR, ADV.)
AND
OMKARAPPA S/O SANABASAPPA SHANTANAVAR,
C/O NINGAPPA S/O SANABASAPPA SHANTANAVAR
AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O TIMMENHALLI,TALUK: RANEBENNUR,DISTRICT: HAVERI.
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.PRUTHVIRAJ P.H., ADV.)
THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC PRAYING
THAT THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE OF THE LOWER APPELLATE
COURT DATED 08.10.2010 IN R.A.NO.105/2008 PASSED BY THE
COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN.) RANEBENNUR MAY KINDLY BE SET
ASIDE AND THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE OF THE TRIAL COURT IN
O.S.NO.252/2006 PASSED BY PRL. CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.) & I ADDL.
JMFC, RANEBENNUR DATED 15.09.2008 MAY ALSO KINDLY BE SET
ASIDE.
2
IN RSA NO.6138/2010
BETWEEN
DEVARAJ S/O BHARAMAPPA PALED
AGE: 36 YRS, OCC: COOLIE,
R/O TIMMENHALLI, RANEBENNUR TQ.581115
... APPELLANT
(BY SRI.AVINASH BANAKAR, ADV.)
AND
KARABASAYYA S/O VEERBHADRAYYA KENCHIRANNAVAR,
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O TIMMENHALLI, RANEBENNUR TQ.581115
... RESPONDENT
(RESPONDENT SERVED & UNREPRESENTED)
THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC PRAYING
THAT THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE OF THE LOWER APPELLATE
COURT DATED 08.10.2010 IN R.A.NO.54/2008 PASSED BY THE
COURT OF ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN.) RANEBENNUR MAY KINDLY
BE SET ASIDE AND THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE OF THE TRIAL
COURT IN O.S.NO.50/2001 PASSED BY PRL. CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.) &
I ADDL. JMFC, RANEBENNUR DATED 02.04.2008 MAY ALSO KINDLY
BE SET ASIDE.
IN RSA NO.6129/2010
BETWEEN
SMT.SHARADAMMA W/O KARABASAPPA KAREKATTI,
AGE: 47 YEARS OCC: COOLIE,
R/O TIMMENHALLI,TALUK: RANEBENNUR,DISTRIC: HAVERI.
... APPELLANT
(BY SRI.AVINASH BANAKAR, ADV.)
3
AND
1. THE CHIEF SECRETARY ZILLA PANCHAYAT,
HAVERI DISTRICT.
2. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
TALUKA PANCHAYAT, RANEBENNUR, DISTRICT: HAVERI.
3. THE SECRETARY GRAM PANCHAYAT,
MALANAYAKANAHALLI ,TALUK: RANEBENNUR, DISTRICT:
HAVERI.
4. SMT.NAGAVVA W/O MAHANTESHGOUDA MALAGI,
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O TIMMENHALLI, TALUK: RANEBENNUR,DISTRICT: HAVERI.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.S.N.BANAKAR, ADV. FOR R3,
SRI.N.R.KUPPELUR, ADV. FOR R4,
R1 SERVED AND REMAINED UNREPRESENTED)
THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC PRAYING
THAT THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE OF THE LOWER APPELLATE
COURT DATED 08.10.2010 IN R.A.NO.66/2008 PASSED BY THE
COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN.) RANEBENNUR MAY KINDLY BE SET
ASIDE AND THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE OF THE TRIAL COURT IN
O.S.NO.158/2001 PASSED BY PRL. CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.) & I ADDL.
JMFC, RANEBENNUR DATED 02.04.2008 MAY ALSO KINDLY BE SET
ASIDE.
IN RSA NO.6127/2010
BETWEEN
1 SHIDDAPPA S/O BASAPPA KAREKATTI
DECEAED BY HIS LRS
1A SUBHADRAMMA W/O SHIDDAPPA KAREKATTI,
AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O TIMMEHANALLI, TQ.RANEBENNUR, DIST: HAVERI
1B GADIGEPPA S/O SHIDDAPPA KAREKATTI,
AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O TIMMEHANALLI, TQ.RANEBENNUR, DIST: HAVERI
4
1C BHARAMAGOUDA S/O SHIDDAPPA KAREKATTI,
AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O TIMMEHANALLI, TQ.RANEBENNUR, DIST: HAVERI
... APPELLANTS
(BY SRI.AVINASH BANAKAR, ADV.)
AND
1. THE CHIEF SECRETARY
ZILLA PANCHAYAT, HAVERI DISTRICT.
2. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER
TALUKA PANCHAYAT, RANEBENNUR, DIST: HAVERI.
3. THE SECRETARY
GRAM PANCHAYAT, MALANAYAKANAHALLI IN RANEBENNUR
TQ, DIST: HAVERI.
4. HUCHANGOUDA S/O KAREBASAPPA SHANTANAVAR
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: TIMMENHALLI, TQ:
RANEBENNUR, DIST: HAVERI.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.S.N.BANAKAR, ADV. FOR R3,
SRI.M.H.PATIL, ADV. FOR R4,
R1 & R2 SERVED AND REMAINED UNREPRESENTED)
THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC PRAYING
THAT THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE OF THE LOWER APPELLATE
COURT DATED 08.10.2010 IN R.A.NO.65/2008 PASSED BY THE
COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN.) RANEBENNUR MAY KINDLY BE SET
ASIDE AND THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE OF THE TRIAL COURT IN
O.S.NO.156/2001 PASSED BY PRL. CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.) & I ADDL.
JMFC, RANEBENNUR DATED 02.04.2008 MAY ALSO KINDLY BE SET
ASIDE.
THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
5
JUDGMENT
All these appeals have common issues though
independent suits were filed. Therefore, these appeals are
taken up together for final disposal.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and
learned counsel for the respondents.
3. The present appeals are filed by the plaintiffs
assailing the judgment and decree of the courts below
wherein the suits filed by the appellants herein seeking
declaration and injunction relating to allotment of a plot to
houseless persons under the housing scheme under the
provisions of the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat
Raj Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for
short).
4. The trial court in all the suits has proceeded to
dismiss the suits by recording a finding that the relief
sought in the present suits cannot be entertained and the
plaintiffs have an efficacious remedy under the provisions
of the Act. The trial court while doing so, placed reliance on
the judgment of a Coordinate Bench of this Court in RSA
No.2570/2005 and connected appeals and proceeded to
dismiss the suits. At this juncture, learned counsel for the
respondents has brought to the notice of this court that,
while placing reliance on the judgment of a Coordinate
Bench of this Court, the trial court has independently
assessed the oral and documentary evidence and on
appreciation of the same has come to the conclusion that
the plaintiffs have failed to establish their right, title and
possession.
5. Be that as it may, the Coordinate Bench of this
court in RSA No.2570/2005 along with connected appeals,
which relates to identical issues under the very same
housing scheme and also the properties involved are one
and the same, has held that disputed question in regard to
conflicting allotment by the authority cannot be adjudicated
before the civil court. The Coordinate Bench of this court
was of the view that, where there are disputed claims, an
independent mechanism is provided under Section 217 of
the Act.
6. Perused the judgment rendered by the
Coordinate Bench of this Court in RSA No.2570/2005 and
connected appeals, which relates to the sites situated in
the same survey number. The present appellants who are
the plaintiffs are questioning the allotment of sites in
favour of the respondents/defendants on the premise that
Pradhan of Mandal Panchayat has no jurisdiction to make
allotment. The question as to whether the allotments are in
accordance with law cannot be adjudicated before the civil
court. This issue is no more res integra, the Coordinate
Bench of this Court has relegated the aggrieved parties to
workout their remedy before the competent authority in
terms of Section 217 of the Act.
7. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on
merits and keeping all contentions open, the appeals filed
by the appellants are liable to be dismissed on the ground
that suits are not maintainable before the civil court, as
there is bar under Section 295 of the Act. In the light of
the judgment rendered by the Coordinate Bench of this
court in RSA No.2570/2005, this court would pass the
following:
ORDER
Appeals are dismissed.
It is open for the appellants to seek redressal of their
grievance in accordance with law.
In view of dismissal of the appeals,
Misc.Cvl.No.111666/2010 in RSA No.6128/2010,
Misc.Cvl.No.111665/2010 in RSA No.6127/2010 and
Misc.Cvl.No.111724/2010 in RSA No.6138/2010 do not
survive for consideration and the same are dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
MBS/-
