Shri Mukund Rao Pohankar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2024 Latest Caselaw 21396 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Shri Mukund Rao Pohankar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 7 August, 2024

Author: Vishal Dhagat

Bench: Vishal Dhagat

                                                                1                                  SA-1305-2010
                             IN        THE    HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                    AT JABALPUR
                                                        BEFORE
                                          HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL DHAGAT
                                                   ON THE 7 th OF AUGUST, 2024
                                                SECOND APPEAL No. 1305 of 2010
                                              SHRI MUKUND RAO POHANKAR
                                                        Versus
                                       THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
                          Appearance:
                             Shri Brian D'silva - Senior Advocate with Shri Rajas Pohankar - Advocate for the
                          appellant.
                             Shri A. K. Rawat - Govt. Advocate for the State.
                                                                    WITH
                                                SECOND APPEAL No. 1304 of 2010
                                              SHRI MUKUND RAO POHANKAR
                                                        Versus
                                       THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
                          Appearance:
                             Shri Brian D'silva - Senior Advocate with Shri Rajas Pohankar - Advocate for the
                          appellant.
                             Shri A. K. Rawat - Govt. Advocate for the State.

                                                                 ORDER

Appellants have filed these Second Appeals before this Court challenging judgment and decree dated 30.7.2010 passed in Civil Appeal Nos. 19A/2009 and 18A/2009 passed by IX Additional District Judge, Jabalpur.

2. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants submitted that Apex Court in case of State of M.P. V Ghisilal - [2021] 10 SCR 1178 held that jurisdiction of the civil courts to try suit relating to land which is

2 SA-1305-2010

subject-matter of ceiling proceedings, stands excluded by implication. Civil Court cannot declare, orders passed by the authorities under the Act as illegal or non est.

3. Apex Court in the said case in para 14 has held as under:-

"14. The Urban land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 is a self-contained Code. Various provisions of the Act make it clear that if any orders are passed by the competent authority, there is provision for appeal, revision before the designated appellate and revisional authorities. In view of such remedies available for aggrieved parties, the jurisdiction of the civil courts to try suit relating to land which is subject-matter of ceiling proceedings, stands excluded by implication. Civil court cannot declare, orders passed by the authorities under the ULC Act, as illegal or non est. More so, when such orders have become final, no declaration could have been granted by the civil court. In this regard reference may be made to the judgment of this Court in the case of Competent Authority, Calcutta, under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976. We are totally in agreement with the aforesaid view taken by this Court."

4. Perused the plaint.

5. On going through the plaint, it is found that plaintiff has sought declaration that report of receiving possession of suit property by Tahsildar, Jabalpur is per se illegal and manipulated. Second relief is asked for permanent injunction against defendants. Apex Court in case of State of M.P. and Ghisilal (supra) has held that jurisdiction of the civil courts to try suit relating to land which is subject-matter of civil proceedings is barred. Suit was filed for declaration of title of plaintiff and to grant permanent injunction against State Government from interfering with the suit property. Suit property is subject-matter under Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation)

3 SA-1305-2010 Act, 1976 and is vested in the State Government. Since property in question is subject-matter of Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, therefore, Civil Courts are barred to entertain civil suit in view of the judgment passed by the Apex Court in State of M.P. Vs. Ghisilal (supra).

6. Civil Court do not have jurisdiction to decide upon the legality of acquisition of land under Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, therefore, both the second appeals stand dismissed.

7. Appellants are at liberty to prosecute appeals, revision or writ petition under the Act itself.

(VISHAL DHAGAT) JUDGE

AD/