High Court Karnataka High Court

Fathegir vs The Land Tribunal Humnabad on 10 February, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Fathegir vs The Land Tribunal Humnabad on 10 February, 2009
Author: Ram Mohan Reddy
 L Bistf"'A&f%€§F ::«*;*2B§eur;;r{i2*, 

BE§0RE; » A}
THE HOWBLE MR.JUsi';<§E I2AM"MC:iEi}§N f€EDDY

WP. I'~.f(5;'S 1 1721 2008 4L1_E;sRESz
BETWEEN:     
Fathegir   _  .4   
S/0 Raznagif    "   
Ageé abQ;1t'6\.;81;?¢3;é.fré.   '
Gee: AgI'i<:Vu1€_1:?0_e "  
Ta}: zilhitguppaw  2 "
Dist:"Bida;r.' V' 
 % _     ..PETI'FIONI'3R
(By Sri Sagjay Patii, Adi'. far
; Sri Pravcr;i1"Kuu':ar Raikote, Adv.)

I)

u 3
u
.m...........-....._.., .

%?rz1¢A%ia::d *§*:r1;3g3:na:

H1;133:2iiabad" 7; 

. RESPONDENT

THIS WRIT PE’I’IT£{)N IS FILED UNSER ARTICLE 226

fam—22? OF’ THE CONSTITUTIGN OF’ mm». PRAYING TO
=QUAsH THE IMFUGNED GRDER A’? AI’~ENEXURE~B DATED
” ” 13.2.1994 VIBE NOML I,-“AS8139 BY ‘I’I~fE RESPONDENT

LAND TRIBUNAL. =
n%
*:’;/j \

WWW W mm: COURT or KARNATAKA mew COURT or KARNKI;

-23..

THIS WEE’? PE’I’§T’¥ON COMING ON FoR”E>RL§}i§é;A;~é:”;aG.

THIS nay, ‘1’I~iE2 COURT MAB8 mg F’0LL<3x:s:_;1§.-:3; ._

The petitioner claims to he1§a%:_ t"i1ed aV:1"V'VA.23p::1)}ica§ié;:i<:;i1

Farm -1 under the iikzgolition Act
far grant sf occupancy?' pf th€~:w1")<$i;tion of land
in Sy.No.94 ef Maéergééfl Irzamdar, which
when r:<311sic§;3:réV¢:¥1 Vi*3;3r fléfi rejected by order
dated 18.2.' this Writ petition fflfid
on «fi;~f5§'ic:'-'if§i,a£eci 18.2.1994, a copy }of

Whicfi–.wa$ gfétrifionér on 13. 1 2. 2005.

2. .. It ié; €vlAsex%?h<=:.i*'e that the discretion ta

='};¥¢;ndgue—- £11e.z3e1g;; like :;fi5%'o:her judicial discretion must be

€Xéf{3iS£dV 'v.ig<:¥}.af:1€t3 and ciztumspection accordirig ii)

' *-.,__,3'1;stiCé; .§3'®m3 ::§fi?;sé.nse ané sound judgment. 113. the instani
;:1¢g}ig:.=v:vn€i-,:'s, inacrtion and want of bouaffles is imp1ztab}c

ti; t§*i€.;§éfi;fion&r. Writ petitien is accoréizlgly dismimefl

sail
3699?'

Bide .

3 Ham kmvtwmxvv ..:n l}lr’u”‘\’\ ucuu