Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2017 (3) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (3) TMI 1915 - KERALA HIGH COURTForgeries - wrong entries made in the revenue records of the State in respect of part of the property - whether Upa Lok Ayukta had jurisdiction to entertain the complaint or not? - HELD THAT:- The matter relates to a civil dispute which is pending before a Court of competent jurisdiction where both the parties have appeared. The nature of dispute is such that it has to be adjudicated by the Civil Court. Thus the matter being substantially sub judice before the Civil Court, in our opinion, the Upa Lok Ayukta ought not to have entertained the complaint at all and left the parties to avail all remedies as per common civil law. Even if both the parties moved the Upa Lok Ayukta, it is well established that consent cannot confer jurisdiction, where there was inherent lack of jurisdiction on the part of Upa Lok Ayukta to entertain such a complaint. Even if both the parties agreed, jurisdiction could not be conferred where the Statute does not provide for it - the complaint ought not to have been entertained by the Lok Ayukta. That being the position, the proceedings before the Lok Ayukta were wholly without jurisdiction and consequentially the orders passed therein cannot be held to be legal, valid and binding. The writ petitioner seeks liberty to withdraw the complaint (Ext. P2) made before the Lok Ayukta in order to move Civil Court or such other competent authority as the petitioner may be advised - the complaint filed before the Lok Ayukta would thus stand withdrawn.
|