Case Note & Summary
The present appeal arose from a suit filed by the appellants, followers of the religious shrine Dam Dama Baba Sahib Singh of Una, seeking a declaration that certain land was dedicated to the shrine and a perpetual injunction restraining the respondents from transferring the land or having it declared surplus under the Punjab Land Reforms Act, 1972. The appellants claimed that the land, though recorded in the name of Tikka Devinder Singh, was actually meant for the shrine and managed by Baba Madhusudan Singh. They alleged that Baba Madhusudan Singh illegally transferred part of the land to the Agriculture Department and to his daughter. The Government had initiated proceedings to declare part of the land as surplus. The trial court dismissed the suit, holding that the appellants failed to prove dedication. The first appellate court partly allowed the appeal, declaring that a 133/290 share of the land belonged to the shrine. The respondents then filed a second appeal before the High Court, which set aside the first appellate court's judgment, holding that the civil court's jurisdiction was barred under Section 21 of the Land Reforms Act. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, holding that the High Court erred in dismissing the suit on the ground of bar of jurisdiction. The Court noted that the issue of jurisdiction was not pressed by the respondents in the trial court and was not challenged in the first appeal, thus they were precluded from raising it in the second appeal. Moreover, Section 21 bars jurisdiction only for suits for specific performance of a contract for transfer of land or to question the validity of proceedings under the Act. The present suit was for declaration of ownership and injunction, which does not fall within the bar. The Court set aside the High Court's order and remitted the matter back to the High Court for fresh consideration on merits.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Bar of Jurisdiction - Section 21 Punjab Land Reforms Act, 1972 - Interpretation - The bar under Section 21 applies only to suits for specific performance of a contract for transfer of land or to question the validity of any proceeding or order under the Act. A suit for declaration that land belongs to a religious shrine and for injunction against transfer does not fall within the bar. (Paras 5-7) B) Civil Procedure - Second Appeal - Issue of Jurisdiction - Waiver - Where the issue of jurisdiction was not pressed by the defendants in the trial court and not challenged in the first appeal, the respondents are precluded from raising it in the second appeal. (Para 5) C) Land Reforms - Religious and Charitable Land - Exemption - The suit sought declaration that land was dedicated to a religious and charitable institution and thus exempt under the Punjab Land Reforms Act, 1972. The Civil Court has jurisdiction to decide such a question of ownership. (Paras 2.5, 7)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Civil Court's jurisdiction is barred under Section 21 of the Punjab Land Reforms Act, 1972 to entertain a suit for declaration and perpetual injunction regarding ownership of land claimed to be dedicated to a religious and charitable institution.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court's order, and remitted the matter back to the High Court for fresh consideration on merits. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Bar of jurisdiction under Section 21 of Punjab Land Reforms Act
- 1972 is limited to suits for specific performance of contract for transfer of land or questioning validity of proceedings under the Act
- Civil Court has jurisdiction to decide ownership of land claimed to be religious and charitable
- Issue of jurisdiction not pressed in trial court cannot be raised in second appeal
