IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE:
THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION No.1410/2019 (GM – CPC) BETWEEN:
SRI T.T.RAJESH S/O T.N.THANGAPPAN, AGED 45 YEARS, R/AT BASAVANAHALLY VILLAGE, SUNTIKOPPA HOBLI, SOMAWARPET TALUK, KODAGU DISTRICT. ... PETITIONER [BY SRI B.S.NAGARAJ, ADV.] AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY CHIEF SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, Dr. AMBEDKAR VEEDI, BENGALURU-560001.
2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, VIDHANA SOUDHA, Dr. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560001.
(DELETED VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 05.02.2019) 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KODAGU DISTRICT, FORT MADIKERI-571201.
4. THE THASILDAR SOMAWARPET TALUK, KODAGU DISTRICT-571201.
(DELETED VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 05.02.2019) 5. THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST ARANYA BHAVAN, MYSURU ROAD, KODAGU DISTRICT, FORT, MADIKERI-571201. …RESPONDENTS [BY SRI ANANDEESWAR D.R., HCGP FOR R-1, R-3 & R-5.) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 05.08.2017 PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, AT SOMAVARPET, TRANSFERRING THE CASE TO SPECIAL COURT, FUNCTIONING IN 3RD FLOOR OF KANDAYA BHAVANA, K.G.ROAD BENGALURU IN O.S.NO.16/2016 THE COPY OF THE SAID ORDER DATED 05.08.2017 IS HEREWITH SUBMITTED AT ANNEXURE-A.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R Learned High Court Government Pleader accepts notice for respondent Nos.1, 3 and 5.
2. The petitioner has challenged the legality and correctness of the order dated 05.08.2017 passed in O.S.No.16/2016 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge & JMFC at Somawarpet ['Trial Court' for short] in transferring the case to the Karnataka Land Grabbing Special Court, functioning in 3rd Floor of Kandaya Bhavana, K.G.Road, Bengaluru.
3. The petitioner herein had filed suit in O.S.No.16/2016 before the Trial Court seeking relief of permanent injunction and to declare that the petitioner is in absolute possession of the suit schedule property, contending that he is an agriculturist, carrying out his avocation as agriculturist in Basavanahally Village and is residing in the schedule property from aeons. The said suit has been transferred to the Special Court, considering the memo filed by the defendants/respondents along with the Government notification issued by the State of Karnataka published in the Special Gazette on 20.10.2014 notifying the constitution of the Special Court for adjudication of the disputes arising under the Karnataka Land Grabbing Prohibition Act, 2011 ['Act' for short] and directing the prosecution to file necessary application to transfer the cases which are pending before the Civil Courts. Accordingly, the Trial Court having held that the jurisdiction to try the present suit is being with the Special Court, transferred the same to the Special Court by the order impugned herein. Hence, this Writ petition.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner placing reliance on the order of this Court in W.P.No.35369/2018 dated 12.10.2018 (Sri.Gangadhara and Others V/s. The State of Karnataka and Others), would contend that no findings are recorded by the Trial Court to transfer the suit to the Special Court. Hence, the order impugned warrants interference by this Court.
5. The learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondents has submitted that the reasons recorded by the Trial Court in as much as the notification dated 20.10.2014 being applicable to the facts of the case, the same requires to be confirmed, rejecting the writ petition.
6. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and perusing the material on record, this Court is of the considered view that the issue involved in this Case is no more res integra in view of the order passed by this Court in the case of Gangadhara supra, the Cognate Bench of this Court has held thus:
“6. As per Sections 7 and 9 of the Act, a Special Court has jurisdiction to try any alleged act of land grabbing, cases in respect of the ownership and title to, or lawful possession of, the land grabbed and offences specified in Chapter XIV-A of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964. The matters specified in Section 7(1) of the Act will fall within the jurisdiction of a Special Court.
7. As per Section 20 of the Act, the trial Court, before directing transfer of any suit to the Special Court, has to examine as to whether the suit would fall within the jurisdiction of the Special Court. Therefore, the trial court will have to examine as to whether the suit relates to any of the matters specified in Section 7(1) of the Act or as to whether any issue relating to those matters would fall for determination in the suit. If the suit involves any of those matters or any issue relating to those matters, then only the suit shall be transferred to the Special Court. In the absence of any such matter or issue, transferring the suit to the Special Court will be contrary to Section 20 of the Act.”
7. In view of the aforesaid observations, the Trial Court transferring the suit to the Special Court without examining as to whether the suit would fall within the jurisdiction of the Special Court or whether the suit involves adjudication of the matters specified in Section 7[1] of the Act or any issue relating to those matters to warrant its transfer to the Special Court cannot be sustained.
8. Hence, the impugned order is set aside.
Matter is remitted to the Trial Court for re-consideration in accordance with law in the light of the observations made in this Order. All contentions of the parties are left open.
Writ petition is allowed in terms of the above.
Sd/- JUDGE NC.