WESTERN COALFIELDS LTD. AND ANR vs. M/S. BALLAPUR COLLIERIES COMPANY . AND ORS

    NON­REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.4487 OF 2009 Western Coalfields Ltd. & Anr.   .. Appellant(s) Versus M/s Ballapur Collieries Company  & Ors.  .. Respondent(s) WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.4488 OF 2009 J U D G M E N T Abhay Manohar Sapre, J. 1. These appeals are filed against  the  common Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by ANITA MALHOTRA Date: 2018.12.11 17:50:50 IST Reason: final judgment and order dated 22.01.2007 passed 1 by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench,   Nagpur   in   Civil   Revision   Application   Nos. 801 & 803 of 2002 whereby the High Court allowed the revision petitions filed by respondent Nos.1­8 herein. 2. The proceedings in question which are subject matter   of   these   appeals   arise   out   of   initiation   of eviction proceedings by the appellants­ Government of  India Company against the respondents under the provisions of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized   Occupation)   Act,   1971   (hereinafter referred   to   as   “the   Act”)   in   relation   to   the   suit property. 3. By   impugned   order,   the   High   Court   in   the revision petitions filed by respondent Nos.1­8 herein under Section 9 of the Act against the order of the District Judge   allowed the revision petitions and held that having regard to the nature of controversy 2 and   factual   issues   raised   by   the   parties   against each other in the eviction proceedings, the proper remedy of the appellants would be to file a civil suit against the respondents for their eviction from the suit properties rather than to take recourse to the summary remedy of eviction under the Act before the Estate Officer.  4. The appellants felt aggrieved by the said order and have filed these appeals by way of special leave in this Court. 5. Having   heard   the   learned   counsel   for   the parties and on perusal of the record of the case and the written submissions filed by the appellants, we are inclined to agree with the observations made by the High Court in the impugned order. 6. In our opinion, keeping in view the nature of the factual controversy raised by the parties before the   Estate   Officer,   the   proper   remedy   of   the 3 appellants   would   be   to   file   civil   suit   against   the respondents   for   their   eviction   from   the   suit properties under the general law rather than to take recourse   to   the   summary   remedy   of   eviction provided under the Act. 7. We, therefore, do not express any opinion on the issues raised by the appellants in their written submissions and accordingly grant liberty to them to   file   a   Civil   Suit   in   the   competent   Court   of jurisdiction   against   the   respondents   for   their eviction in relation to the suit properties and raise all such pleas in the suit on merits.  8. We,   however,   make   it   clear   that   the respondents will not be allowed to raise a plea that the suit is barred by limitation.   9. Let the suit be filed within 6 months by the appellants against the respondents so as to enable 4 the   Civil   Court   to   decide   the   same   on   merits   in accordance with law. 10. With   these   observations,   the   appeals   are accordingly disposed of.    ………………………………..J  (ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE)             …..………………………………J.      (INDU MALHOTRA) New Delhi, December 11, 2018 5