Punjab-Haryana High Court
Surinder Pal Singh vs District Judge on 23 November, 2011
Author: Jaswant Singh
Bench: Jaswant Singh
C.R.No.703 of 2011 #1#
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND
HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
C.R.No.703 of 2011
Date of Decision: 23.11.2011
Surinder Pal Singh
....Petitioner
Versus
District Judge, Kurukshetra and others
....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present: None for the petitioner.
None for respondent Nos.1,2,4 & 5.
Mr. G.S. Bal, Advocate for respondent Nos.3 & 7. JASWANT SINGH, J By filing the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution, plaintiff-petitioner has assailed the impugned order dated 6.1.2011 (P.3) passed by the learned District Judge, Kurukshetra whereby the reference dated 17.12.2010 (P.2) made by the learned Nyayadhikari-cum-JMIC Gram Nyayalaya, Shahabad (M) Kurukshetra has been declined and the matter has been sent back to the learned Nyayalaya for its decision as per law.
Brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff-petitioner filed a suit for declaration to the effect that he is the owner of the share of the C.R.No.703 of 2011 #2# properties described in the head note of the plaint left by late Ravinder Singh in Revenue Estate of Village Jharoli Khurd, Tehsil Shahbad, District Kurukshetra being the Jagir Estate and the defendants have no right to own the said property. The case was entrusted to the learned Nyayadhikari-respondent No.2 by the learned District Judge, Kurukshetra, who started to proceed with the matter. It seems that on 17.12.2010, when the case was fixed for rebuttal evidence and arguments, the parties realized and made statements that in view of the relief claimed in the suit, the same is not within the jurisdiction of the learned Nyayalaya. In these circumstance, learned Nyayalaya taking note of Part I of Second Schedule under Section 13 of the Gram Nyayalayas Act, 2008 (for short "the Act") came to the conclusion that the subject matter is without jurisdiction and thus reference was made to the learned District Judge, Kurukshetra to transfer and assign the case before a Court of competent jurisdiction. Learned District Judge, perused the case file along with reference dated 17.12.2010 and came to the conclusion that Nyayadhikari is very well competent to adjudicate the matter in controversy and as such referred the matter back vide the impugned order for its decision according to law, hence the present petition.
After perusing the paper book with the assistance of learned counsel for the respondents, this Court finds that the impugned order passed by the learned District Judge, Kurukshetra is not sustainable and liable to be set aside.
C.R.No.703 of 2011 #3# There is no dispute that initially the suit was filed on 1.7.2002 and the present Act came into operation w.e.f 7.1.2009. Section 13 of the Act reads as under:
"13. Civil jurisdiction.- (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908) or any other law for theh time being in force, and subject to sub-section (2), the Gram Nyayalaya shall have jurisdiction to-
(a) try all suits or proceedings of a civil nature falling under the classes of disputes specified in Part I of the Second Schedule;
(b) try all classes of claims and disputes which may be notified by the Central Government under sub-section (1) of Section 14 and by the State Government under sub-section (3) of the said section. (2) The pecuniary limits of the Gram Nyayalaya shall be such as may be specified by the High Court, in consultation with the State Government, by notification, from time to time."
Further Part I of Second Schedule appended under the Act reads as under:
"SUITS OF A CIVIL NATURE WITHIN THE
JURISDICTION OF GRAM NYAYALAYAS
(i) Civil Disputes:
(a) right to purchase of property;
(b) use of common pasture:
(c) regulation and timing of taking water from irrigation
channel.
(ii) Property Disputes:
(a) village and farm houses (Possession);
(b) water channel;
(c) right to draw water from a well or tube well.
C.R.No.703 of 2011 #4#
(iii) xx xx"
A perusal of clause (a) Sub Section (1) of Section 13 makes it abundantly clear that the learned Gram Nyayalaya shall have jurisdiction to try suits or proceedings of a civil nature specified under Part I of the Second Schedule. A bare perusal of Part I of Second Schedule reproduced hereinabove nowhere envisages that a suit for declaration in respect of a Jagir Estate, is falling in the categories specified therein and as such, the learned Gram Nyayalaya has no jurisdiction to entertain a suit in respect of declaration relating to a Jagir Property between the parties. Thus, the learned Nyayadhikari has rightly made a reference to the District Judge, Kurukshetra for sending the matter before a court of competent jurisdiction but the same has wrongly been rejected by the learned District Judge while passing the impugned order, which is not sustainable in view of the facts and circumstances discussed hereinabove.
In view the facts and circumstances of the present case, present petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 6.1.2011 (P.3) is set aside and the learned District Judge, Kurukshetra is directed to entrust the civil suit pending between the parties to the Civil Court of competent jurisdiction instead of sending the matter to the learned Gram Nyayalaya. Parties to appear on 19.1.2012 before the learned District Judge, Kurukshetra.
November 23, 2011 ( JASWANT SINGH ) manoj JUDGE