Research › Browse › Judgment

Supreme Court of India · body

2008 DIGILAW 121 (SC)

NAGARJUNA GRAMMENA BANK v. MEDI NARAYANA

2008-01-23

H.K.SEMA, LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA

body2008
ORDER : 1. These appeals have been filed by the decree-holders. In the midst of hearing of these appeals, a peculiar problem has been brought to our notice by the learned counsel appearing for the parties that under the Andhra Pradesh Civil Courts Act, 1972 (hereinafter for short “Act 19 of 1972”) a notification has been issued by the Governor in exercise of powers under sub-section (3) of Section 1 of Act 19 of 1972 by which the jurisdiction of the Civil Courts has come into force in the whole State of Andhra Pradesh except in the Scheduled Areas of the State. 2. It is contended by Mr P.S. Narasimha, learned counsel appearing for the appellant(s) that even before coming into force of the Act, the Civil Courts had been established in the Scheduled Areas and they have been functioning since 1950. The appellant(s) decree-holders obtained a decree from the Civil Court in the Scheduled Areas, however, since the operation of Act 19 of 1972 is excluded from the Scheduled Areas of the State, they are unable to execute the decree. The High Court, in its impugned judgment Meda Narayana v. Nagarjuna Grameena Bank, CRP No. 2888 of 1998, order dated 27-6-2000 (AP) held that as the Act itself is not applicable in the Scheduled Areas, the decree passed by the Civil Court is null and void and inexecutable. It has been brought to our notice that now many non-Scheduled people are residing in the Scheduled Areas of the State including owners of commercial and business houses. That apart, many banks have been established including the appellant Banks, who are non-Scheduled people and they are being deprived of resolution of the disputes through the Civil Courts. Even in those cases which have been decided by the Civil Courts, the decrees could not be executed because the Civil Courts Act is not applicable and the decree passed by the Civil Courts in the Scheduled Areas has been declared null and void. These are the contentions over which we have given our serious consideration. 3. A dispute may arise between the people of the Scheduled Areas and non-Scheduled Areas in which case, in our view, the people of the non-Scheduled Areas cannot be subjected to the methodology and the procedure adopted while resolving the dispute between the people of the Scheduled Areas. These are the contentions over which we have given our serious consideration. 3. A dispute may arise between the people of the Scheduled Areas and non-Scheduled Areas in which case, in our view, the people of the non-Scheduled Areas cannot be subjected to the methodology and the procedure adopted while resolving the dispute between the people of the Scheduled Areas. In our view, therefore, a mechanism has to be evolved in a case where the dispute involved is between the people of the Scheduled Areas and non-Scheduled Areas. One way of resolving this problem is by either issuing a notification or by an amendment in the Act to the extent that the Civil Courts Act shall be extended to the Scheduled Areas of the State except where the dispute involved is between the people of the Scheduled and non-Scheduled Areas. 4. While saying this we also took note of the observation made by the High Court. The High Court, while allowing the petition, also took note of the submission of the counsel for the appellant that it is necessary to confer the jurisdiction over the Scheduled Areas on the Civil Courts also. The High Court observed that it is for the State Government to take expeditious steps as early as possible to issue a notification extending the provisions of the Civil Courts Act even with retrospective effect in the Scheduled Areas for peace and good governance and for the speedy disposal of the civil cases in the Scheduled Areas. A copy of the High Court order was also directed to be endorsed to the Home Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh. It is unfortunate that no steps appear to have been taken pursuant to such observation. 5. In this view of the matter, we are now of the view that the matter requires serious consideration of the State Government at the earliest in terms of our suggestions as noted above. Mr H.S. Gururaja Rao, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the State prays for three months' time for taking necessary steps in the matter and issuing appropriate notification in this regard. 6. List these matters after three months. The Registry shall send a copy of this order to the Registrar General of the Andhra Pradesh High Court who shall coordinate with the State Government for doing the needful.