High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Review Petitions in Urban Land Ceiling Case — No Error Apparent on Record. Review petitioner failed to demonstrate any error apparent on the face of the record in the order dated 17/06/2016 passed in WP Nos.54609-54610/2014(ULC) under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976.

High Court: Karnataka High Court Bench: BENGALURU
  • 1
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The review petitions were filed by M/s Vivekananda Foundation (R), claiming to be the allottee of a portion of land in Sy.Nos.81 and 82 of Kasaba Hobli, Mysore Taluk. The land was originally owned by the petitioner in WP Nos.54609-54610/2014(ULC). The family held 8 acres 29 guntas of land which fell within the urban area of Mysuru, attracting the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976. In proceedings initiated by the ULC authorities, the petitioner's right to the land was restricted to 6000 square metres, and the remaining land was required to be surrendered to the State. The matter had been subject to several rounds of litigation, culminating in the order dated 17/06/2016 in the writ petitions. The review petitioner sought review of that order under Section 114 and Order 47 Rule 1 of CPC, but the Court found no error apparent on the face of the record and dismissed the review petitions.

Headnote

A) Civil Procedure - Review - Error Apparent on the Face of the Record - Section 114, Order 47 Rule 1 CPC - The review petitioner sought review of an order dated 17/06/2016 in WP Nos.54609-54610/2014(ULC) on the ground that the writ petitioner had suppressed material facts. The Court held that the review petitions did not disclose any error apparent on the face of the record and dismissed them. (Para 1-3)

B) Urban Land Ceiling - Surrender of Excess Land - Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 - The writ petitioner's family held 8 acres 29 guntas of land in Sy.Nos.81 and 82 of Kasaba Hobli, Mysore Taluk, which attracted the ULC Act. The ULC authorities restricted the petitioner's right to 6000 square metres and required the remaining land to be surrendered to the State. (Para 2-3)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the review petitions filed under Section 114 and Order 47 Rule 1 of CPC disclose any error apparent on the face of the record in the order dated 17/06/2016 passed in WP Nos.54609-54610/2014(ULC).

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The review petitions are dismissed as they do not disclose any error apparent on the face of the record.

Law Points

  • Review jurisdiction
  • Error apparent on the face of the record
  • Section 114 CPC
  • Order 47 Rule 1 CPC
  • Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act 1976
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2019 LawText (KAR) (01) 117

Review Petition Nos.255/2018 & 56/2019 in WP Nos.54609-54610/2014(ULC)

2019-02-22

S.N.Satyanarayana

Srinivasa Murthy S

M/s Vivekananda Foundation (R)

State of Karnataka, Principal Secretary to Government Urban Development, Deputy Commissioner Mysore District, L. M. Manoj Kumar

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Review petitions under Section 114 and Order 47 Rule 1 of CPC seeking review of an order dated 17/06/2016 in WP Nos.54609-54610/2014(ULC).

Remedy Sought

Review of the order dated 17/06/2016 passed in WP Nos.54609-54610/2014(ULC).

Filing Reason

The review petitioner claimed to be the allottee of a portion of land and sought review on the ground that the writ petitioner had suppressed material facts.

Previous Decisions

The order dated 17/06/2016 in WP Nos.54609-54610/2014(ULC) was passed by the High Court of Karnataka. The matter had been subject to several rounds of litigation earlier.

Issues

Whether the review petitions disclose any error apparent on the face of the record in the order dated 17/06/2016.

Submissions/Arguments

The review petitioner argued that the writ petitioner had suppressed material facts.

Ratio Decidendi

Review petitions under Section 114 and Order 47 Rule 1 of CPC can only be entertained if there is an error apparent on the face of the record. The review petitioner failed to demonstrate any such error.

Judgment Excerpts

These review petitions are filed by M/s. Vivekananda Foundation (R), who is said to be the allottee of a portion of land in Sy.Nos.81 and 82 of Kasaba Hobli, Mysore Taluk. The records would indicate that the writ petitioner’s family held 8 acres 29 guntas of land in the aforesaid two survey numbers which had come within the urban area of Mysuru, hence, attracted the provisions of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976. These review petitions are filed Under section 114 and Order 47 Rule 1 of CPC, praying to review the order dated:17/06/2016 passed in WP Nos.54609-54610/2014(ULC).

Procedural History

The writ petitioner's family held land in Sy.Nos.81 and 82 of Kasaba Hobli, Mysore Taluk. The ULC authorities restricted the petitioner's right to 6000 square metres and required surrender of excess land. The matter went through several rounds of litigation, culminating in the order dated 17/06/2016 in WP Nos.54609-54610/2014(ULC). The review petitioner filed Review Petition Nos.255/2018 and 56/2019 seeking review of that order.

Acts & Sections

  • Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC): Section 114, Order 47 Rule 1
  • Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976:
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Review Petitions in Urban Land Ceiling Case — No Error Apparent on Record. Review petitioner failed to demonstrate any error apparent on the face of the record in the order dated 17/06/2016 passed in WP Nos.54609-5...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Appeal of Dependents of Deceased Driver Under Employees Compensation Act — Death During Course of Employment Despite Alleged Termination and Drunkenness. Employer Failed to Prove Termination; Accident Held to Arise Out of E...