Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Ratheesh K.R. vs The State Of Kerala on 6 September, 2022
Bench: Ajay Rastogi, B.V. Nagarathna
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 4948/2018
RATHEESH K.R. & ORS. Appellant(s)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF KERALA & ORS. Respondent(s)
ORDER
Delay in filing appeal is condoned.
Notice was issued by this Court on 07.05.2018. As per office report, the respondents are duly served. The State of Kerala/respondent has put in appearance but none appears on behalf of the contesting respondents.
The present appeal is directed against the order of the National Green Tribunal dated 04.07.2017. The appellants herein earlier approached the High Court by filing of a writ petition (C) No. 19564 of 2011 on 13.07.2011 complaining illegal reclamation of lake and consequent damage caused to the Oonnipads which was registered with the State Authorities dated 31.12.2010. Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by GEETA AHUJA Date: 2022.09.08 10:06:27 IST
The High Court after taking note of the objections raised by the Reason: contesting parties was of the view that what has been prayed for by 2 the appellants has to be agitated before the competent forum and disposed of the Writ Petition on 25.07.2013 with the following directions:
“131. The upshot of the above discussion is as follows:
W.P.(C) Nos. 4808/12, 2947/13 and 28485/11 will stand dismissed. W.P.(C) No. 8299/12, 19564/11, 34799/11 and 12965/12 are disposed of as follows: As far as encroachment by the company is concerned, we notice that already action has been taken under the Land Conservancy Act. We only direct that the said action will be proceeded with in accordance with law and we also reiterate that it will be open to the Company to take up all the contentions available in law. We decline jurisdiction in so far as reliefs relating to compensation and the restoration of stake nets are concerned in W.P. (C) No. 19564/11. But we make it clear that the petitioners are free to agitate their grievances in any competent forum.” The order came to be passed by the High Court relegating the appellants to avail remedy available under the law. Taking that to be a basis, the appellants approached the National Green Tribunal by filing Miscellaneous Application No. 35 of 2016 (SZ). On the date of hearing, an objection was raised that there was a delay of 57 days in filing of the main application under Section 15 of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010.
The learned Tribunal considered the matter and arrived at the 3 conclusion that the appellants are entitled for protection under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, but still there was a delay of 57 days and that could not be condoned and accordingly dismissed the application on the ground of limitation and has not considered it appropriate to examine the dispute raised by the appellants on merits under the order impugned which is the subject matter of challenge in the present appeal before us.
What was prayed for by the appellants in reference to their complaint of illegal reclamation of lake and consequent damage caused to the Oonnipads dated 31.12.2010 was indeed a recurring cause of action and everyday loss caused to claim damages give them a fresh cause of action and this has been completely missed by the Tribunal while examining whether their complaint is within the period of limitation to be examined on merits.
After we have heard the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the view that the Tribunal has committed manifest error in dismissing the application on the ground of limitation and have not granted opportunity to the appellants to address their complaint on merits.
Consequently, the appeal is allowed. The order passed by the Tribunal to nonsuit the appellants on the ground of limitation is, 4 hereby quashed and set aside. No costs.
The Miscellaneous Application No. 35 of 2016 (SZ) is restored on the file of the Tribunal with the direction to consider it on merits after hearing the parties in accordance with law.
Let the parties record their presence before the Tribunal on 11/10/2022.
Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
…..………………………J. (AJAY RASTOGI) …..………………………J. (B.V. NAGARATHNA) NEW DELHI SEPTEMBER 06, 2022.5
ITEM NO.6 COURT NO.9 SECTION XVII
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Civil Appeal No(s). 4948/2018
RATHEESH K.R. & ORS. Appellant(s)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF KERALA & ORS. Respondent(s)
Date : 06-09-2022 This appeal was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGARATHNA For Appellant(s) Mr. Sanjay Parikh, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Srishti Agnihotri, AOR Mr. Satwik Parikh, Adv.
Ms. Sanjana Grace Thomas, Adv.
Ms. Mantika Vohra, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. C. K. Sasi, AOR Mr. Abdullah Naseeh, Adv.
Ms. Meena K. Poulose, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The appeal is allowed in terms of the signed order. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of accordingly.
(MONIKA DEY) (ASHWANI THAKUR)
COURT MASTER (NSH) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS
(Signed order is placed on the file)