Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2015 (7) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (7) TMI 1329 - HC - Indian LawsDemand for payment of property tax on the suit property - coercive steps for recovery of the impugned amount of property tax - Right to file an appeal - HELD THAT:- A suit for its maintainability requires no authority of law and it is enough that no statute bars the suit - Courts have the jurisdiction to try all suits of a civil nature with the only limitation being the right expressly or impliedly barred by law. Many statutes contain express bars with respect to the right to file a civil suit. For instance, Section 293 of the Income Tax Act contains such a bar. Similarly there are a number of other statutes containing such a bar - except where a civil suit is specifically barred under a particular statute there can be no bar to a civil suit. A suit for its maintainability requires no authority of law. It is enough that no statute bars the suit. The jurisdiction of civil court is all embracing. It is determined on the basis of pleadings of the plaintiff in the suit. The mere fact that a statute provides for certain remedies is not sufficient to exclude jurisdiction of civil courts. The right to approach the civil courts is an inherent right which normally cannot be taken away or presumed to be taken away. The right is too strong to be denied by indirect means. Only a specific bar could take it away. While on the question of express or implied bar to a civil suit, the Division Bench noted that elsewhere in the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957, where the legislature intended to create a specific bar to exercise of right to file a civil suit, it had specifically provided for it. In this connection the Division Bench made a reference to Sections 347A, 347B and 347E of the Act, in matters relating to unauthorised construction in properties and demolition of such construction, the statute having established an Appellate Tribunal before which the parties were entitled to agitate their grievances. In all such cases appeals were provided to the Appellate Tribunal and further appeal was provided from the order of the Appellate Tribunal to the Administrator under Section 347B. Section 347E was providing for a complete bar on the power of a civil court to entertain any suit/application or other proceedings in respect of any order or notice appealable under Section 343 or Section 347B. Since the learned Single Judge has not looked into the issue required by law to be looked into and the error in the impugned decision is to overlook the distinction where jurisdiction of a civil court is expressly barred under a statute and where the jurisdiction is impliedly barred due to a remedy available under a statute but the remedy is onerous and has also not looked into the pleadings to determine whether a limited window was opened to the plaintiffs to maintain the civil action - We dispose of the two appeals declaring that there is no absolute bar to the maintainability of a suit challenging assessment and levy of property tax under the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957, but the scope of the suit would be limited i.e. the challenge would be limited in light of the law declared. The Registry is directed to list the suit for directions before the Roster Bench on August 10, 2015.
|