Haryana Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1972 – s.26 – Bar of Jurisdiction – Suit land was subjected to ceiling under the Act and the prescribed authority had passed an order in relation to the suit land – Two civil suits were filed by the two sets of persons claiming interest in the suit land – High Court held that both civil suits were barred and thus, were not triable by the civil court in the light of express bar contained in s.26 of the Act – Held: s.26(b) of the Act clearly bars filing of civil suit to examine the legality of the order passed by the prescribed authority under the Act – In other words, the civil court’s jurisdiction is expressly taken away by s.26(b) of the Act from examining the legality of orders under the Act – Thus, the High Court was justified in dismissing the appellants’ suits as being barred by virtue of the bar contained in s.26 of the Act – Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – s.9.
Dismissing the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1. The High Court was justified in holding that both the civil suits were barred and thus were not triable by the Civil Court in the light of express bar contained in Section 26 of the Haryana Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1972. [Para 17] [4-E]
2. Mere perusal of the plaint in both the civil suits would go to show that the plaintiffs (appellants) had challenged therein the legality of the order passed by the Prescribed Authority under the Act and prayed that the order be declared null and void. [Para 18] [5-A-B]
3. Section 9 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 provides that the Courts shall have jurisdiction to try all suits of civil nature excepting suits of which their cognizance is either expressly or impliedly barred. [Para 19] [5-B-C]
4. Section 26 (b) of the Act clearly bars filing of civil suit to examine the legality of the order passed by the Prescribed Authority under the Act. In other words, the Civil Court’s jurisdiction is expressly taken away by Section 26(b) of the Act from examining the legality of orders passed under the Act. The remedy of the plaintiffs in such case lies in filing appeal/revision under Section 18 of the Act against the order of the Prescribed Authority. [Para 20] [5-C-D]
Dhulabhai v. State of M.P. AIR 1969 SC 78 :
[1968] 3 SCR 662 – referred to.
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.