HIGH COURT DISMISSES APPEAL – UNDUE DELAY OF 7 YEARS ON DELAYED PROCEEDINGS UNDER PTCL ACT
In a recent judgment, the High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, dismissed an appeal challenging an order related to the initiation of proceedings under the Karnataka Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 (PTCL Act). The court, in its decision, upheld the order of the learned Single Judge, emphasizing the significance of timely action under the PTCL Act.
In its judgment, the court stated, “The initiation of proceedings by the grantee after a period of 7 years is an afterthought, especially after receiving the entire sale consideration from the respondent No.3.” The court further added that the grantee’s contention of fraud, without proper pleading and supporting evidence, could not be accepted. It highlighted that the appellant had executed a registered sale deed, making it implausible to claim that the sale deed was executed under the guise of a mortgage deed.
The case revolved around a land transfer dispute concerning a 3-acre property in Alla Nagar, Koppal Taluk and District. The appellant, a grantee belonging to a deprived community, had sold the land to the respondent No.3 through a registered sale deed in 2005. However, the appellant later initiated proceedings for the resumption of the land under Section 5 of the PTCL Act, alleging a violation of Section 4(2) of the Act.
The Assistant Commissioner, followed by the Deputy Commissioner, confirmed the resumption of the land. Subsequently, the respondent No.3 filed a writ petition challenging the orders. The learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition, quashing the impugned orders and leading to the filing of the present appeal.
The appellant’s counsel argued that the learned Single Judge erred in setting aside the orders of the Assistant Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner, citing a delay in initiating the proceedings under the PTCL Act. However, the court rejected this argument, stating that the appellant’s delay of 7 years was unreasonable and not within a reasonable time frame as per the precedent set by the Supreme Court in the case of Nekkanti Rama Laxmi.
The judgment serves as a reminder of the importance of timely initiation of proceedings under the PTCL Act. It establishes that delay in pursuing one’s rights can lead to adverse consequences. The dismissal of the appeal reaffirms the principle that applications for restoration and resumption of land must be filed within a reasonable period.
This judgment contributes to the jurisprudence surrounding land acquisition and the application of the PTCL Act, emphasizing the need for diligence and prompt action to protect the rights of the concerned parties.
Quote of the Judgment: “The initiation of proceedings by the grantee after a period of 7 years is an afterthought, especially after receiving the entire sale consideration from the respondent No.3.”
Date of Judgment: 23rd June 2023
ERAPPA vs Assistant-Commissioner
