Karnataka HC Upholds Amendments To Civil Courts Act & High Court Act On Jurisdiction To Hear Appeals, Strikes Down Retrospective Operation

The Karnataka High Court has upheld the amendments made to the Karnataka Civil Courts Act, 1964 and the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961 insofar as it relates to appeals from the Civil Judge (Senior Division) lying to the District Court, and the first appeals lying to the High Court from the City Civil Court being heard by a Single Judge irrespective of pecuniary jurisdiction.Justice M I Arun said, “All other amendments to the Karnataka Civil Courts Act, 1964 (Karnataka Act 21 of 1964), amended by way of Karnataka Civil Courts (Amendment) Act, 2023 (Karnataka Act No.33 of 2024) are upheld. Amendments to the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961 (Karnataka Act No.5 of 1962) amended by way of Karnataka High Court (Amendment) Act, 2023 (Karnataka Act No.32 of 2024) are upheld.” It added “The pending first appeals shall be transferred to the jurisdictional Court as per the Karnataka Civil Courts (Amendment) Act, 2023 as expeditiously as possible and the judgments rendered till then by the Courts of competent jurisdiction as per un-amended provisions shall be valid. Similarly, all judgments rendered by the Division Bench of the High Court of Karnataka under the un-amended provisions shall be saved till the Karnataka High Court (Amendment) Act, 2023, is given effect to and acted upon.” Further it held, “The retrospective effect given to the amendment from 28.08.2007 to the Karnataka Civil Courts Act as per Karnataka Act No.33 of 2024 is hereby set aside, and the amendment shall be given prospective effect.” The court passed the order while partly allowing the petition filed by one Baburao who had challenged the amendments contending that it adversely affects the petitioner's vested right to the forum of appeal, which is not merely a matter of procedure but a substantive right. Moreover, the retrospective effect given to the Karnataka Civil Courts Act, 1964 is arbitrary, unreasonable and in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The state government justified the Amendments and submitted that taking into consideration the huge pendency of first appeals before the Karnataka High Court and a large number of District Judges available in the State, an amendment is brought about to the Karnataka Civil Courts Act, 1964 and the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961 wherein the first appeal from the Civil Judge (Senior Division) would now be heard by the District Court. The bench agreed with the same saying “The aforementioned contention of the learned Additional Advocate General is indeed supported by statistics in respect of the pending first appeals before the High Court of Karnataka.” The state contended that, considering the increased value of land and other transactions that people are entering into and the increased valuation of suits, it would be appropriate for a Single Judge of the High Court to hear all the first appeals instead of a Division Bench. Thus, both decisions are not in violation of the objects of their respective Acts or the Constitution of India.Further, it was argued that one of the objects of the amendment is to reduce the pendency before the High Court and the time taken for deciding the first appeals. It WAs submitted that in some of the cases, a few litigants may be put to hardship, but that is not a ground for setting aside the amendments, as the same has been passed in accordance with law and none of the rights of the litigants are violated. The bench on going through the records said “The amendments made to the Karnataka Civil Courts Act, 1964 and the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961 insofar as it relates to appeals from the Civil Judge (Senior Division) lying to the District Court, and the first appeals lying to the High Court from the City Civil Court being heard by a Single Judge irrespective of pecuniary jurisdiction, cannot be found fault with and are perfectly valid in law.” The bench concluded that the retrospective effect given to the Karnataka Civil Courts (Amendment) Act, 2023 will have to be considered as a mistake by the legislature and has to be held as arbitrary and unreasonable.Thus, it directed “All judgments rendered by the Division Bench of the High Court of Karnataka under the un-amended provisions shall be saved till the Karnataka High Court (Amendment) Act, 2023, is given effect to and acted upon.” Appearance: Senior Advocate Ameeth Kumar Deshpande a/w Advocates Ganesh Subhashchandra Kalaburagi, Deshapande G V, Anantha S, Jhagirdar for Petitioner.AAG Kiran V Ron, Malhara Rao, Y.H Vijay Kumar a/w AGA Sheshadri Jaishankar M for Respondents. Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar). 333Case Title: Baburao AND State of Karnataka Case No: WRIT PETITION NO.201536 OF 2024 Click Here To Read/Download Order

Karnataka HC Upholds Amendments To Civil Courts Act & High Court Act On Jurisdiction To Hear Appeals, Strikes Down Retrospective Operation

Mustafa Plumber

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Mustafa Plumber

Karnataka HC Upholds Amendments To Civil Courts Act & High Court Act On Jurisdiction To Hear Appeals, Strikes Down Retrospective Operation

Mustafa Plumber

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Mustafa Plumber

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers