Sri La Sri
Sivaprakasa Pandara Sannadhi, Avargal Vs. Smt. T.Parvathi Ammal & Ors
[1996] INSC 289 (20 February 1996)
J.S.
Verma, N.P. Singh, B.N. Kirpal
ACT:
HEAD NOTE:
(With
Contempt Petition No. 103 of 1995) O R D E R The only question for decision
relates to the jurisdiction of the Civil Court to entertain the suit which was filed by the respondents.
The Trial Court decreed the suit. The First appellate Court set aside the
decree taking the view that the civil Court's jurisdiction was barred. In the
second appeal filed by the present respondents, the High court has restored the
judgment and decree of the Trial Court taking the view that the Civil Court's jurisdiction was not barred.
The
plea of exclusion off the Civil Court's
jurisdiction to adjudicate the title of the parties in the present case is
based on the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Minor Inam (Abolition and Conversion
into Ryotwari) Act, 1963. This Court in a recent decision in R. Manickanaicker
vs. E. Elumalainaicker, 1995 (4) SCC 156, has clearly held
that the Civil Court's jurisdiction to adjudicate title
to the parties, is not barred by virtue of the provisions of the said Act. This
is a direct decision of this Court on the provisions of the Act with which we
are concerned in the present case, Learned counsel for the appellant placed
reliance on the decision in Vatticherukuru village Panchayat vs. Nori Venkatarama
Deeshithulu and Ors. , 1991 (Supp. 2) SCC 228. It is sufficient to observe that
this decision relates to the provisions under a different Act of Andhra
Pradesh. Moreover, in R. Manickanaicker, this decision relating to the
provisions in the Andhra Pradesh Act was considered and distinguished. In view
of the direct decision of this Court in R. Manickanaicker, there is no merit in
this appeal. The appeal and the contempt petition are dismissed. No costs.
Back
Pages: 1 2