High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri Rajendra Thimmaiah vs The Spl Tahsildar Bangalore North … on 25 June, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Sri Rajendra Thimmaiah vs The Spl Tahsildar Bangalore North … on 25 June, 2009
Author: N.Kumar And Gowda


BETWEEN:

:15 ‘ran HIGH comm’ our mmxazmim AT é

Dated this the 23:}; day of n

PRESEMT _ ;”_ _ – ,__,
THE Hon*n1..E MR. Jusflca N ‘

~55?

THE» HOIFBLE am, ,1UsT;ic$]’i:». sssnmam howm.
Writ A1:rpea i# _v§c..”3:fi->3 cf zéogf; :.§<1.R)

1 Rajcndra .

S/o11anmmgan_*_*a’-

about yca1;_S’ ~ .

R] :5 1556.2 1 I’, PC-licaaé Road

V, _: Baugalofe ._–¢ 560 1:353

” _ XE’! £3 Thimraaiah
‘- ._ . Agéti,_ai:-.c}t:t 38 years
‘ Rio’ ‘P5153211, Police Road
Rana:-Esiinghpet

– 560 053 …Appci1a31ts

(By Sn’ M. S. Vaxadarajan, Advocate)

V’ 1 The Special Tahsildar

Bangalore North Taluk

Bangalore V

2 Assistant Commissioncr
Bangalore North
Sub«-Bivizafin
Barxgalorc

3 Deputy Qmzzmissioner
Bangalore District
Bangalore

4 S, Shivanna

SI 0 late Siddappa

Aged about 75
Agriczuiturist

R/at 119.331; 1 V ,
(3/0 Sitlclappa as.

Cloth Mefnhént 3;

5
‘t-31¢ laté Sjddappa,
Majm: ‘ . .

Flour
Karnzajaka
Bas3ga£ore”=r«5§Qv613 mfiespondents

‘ ‘~ ‘«.,(Esyi_Smt AJ). Vijaya, AGA for R1 to R3;
* ” »,_S’:..=i fieufimanabha Mahala, Senior Counsel for
‘ V “s:i’r Krishna Advocate fur Cl R4;
. M R Sharadamani, Advocate. for R5)

This Writ. Apml filacl Under Sectien 4 of the Kaxnataka

C<:vu;rt Act praying to set aside that orcicrzr pt-Iiflfitd in Wfit
_ "P6titi£)n NE). 1640/2003 dated $34! 10} 2005.

— This Writ Appeal gaming on for hearing this day,
N. KUHAR J., delivered the follmving: \l}V//

Jggeugnz
The appellant has challenged in this
passed by the learned Single Judgc;’si?ho«h;3$” eeee ; x
passed by the {Deputy ‘
and Tahsfldar under seea’ee f 135 efw..1;he..

Revenue Act. —

2; The subjv wt fjI:_1a’–.*_.’1:c1_?;_ vof~-._1;ki$~e1)mocedings is land

healing Sy.N0.42_/2 ggfixltas omtnplised in

~sfee1;e«e§§:hpee Hobii, Bangalore North Taluk.
The eeee. the “fie that the said land eeigeaally’ .

to dnfe Paiyada Kaiaiah. He said the same in

1% f5l§§;;:,1rE”‘s£if fiesta! Hanumaiah under a registered sale deed dateacl

I $w9.Vi’9a@}.’ said Patel Hauumaiah mortgagee: the said

p1t3pcrt_:?’;’r’iI;1′.:’~”févour of the fixst appcilanfs g;IaI:d~fathcr Patadi

Chofi Rangaiah. Subscquenfly, Rangaiah puztzhasrsxi the

Veefipmeerqr under e registered sale deed dated 91.12.1924.

exercised hi3 rights ref Gwnemhip, mortgagw the

properties and cultivated the 13nd. After his death, his 3011

k/./

4
Thimmariah inhcxited the property. After the death of

Thimmaiah. Lakshmidcvamma. his widow, the
pmpcrty. Afim” the dcafh of Lakshmidcvamma, thg-..

have inherited the property. _. __ _ _

3. In so far as the mspondents

contention i; that this property Wafi

grand father by name H’

mortgage dead dated 07.{}2.1£32§.u fim1Iy’

partJ’tio11, which is again’ V b3.i a paltitzion

deed ii__at::-_»zl– property has faiicn to thezir
share. made by them, mutation

haggjbésczg cnVt;e1*s§V§V their name. In fact 29 guntas of the said

the mJ.lW’ ays and they have mociveti

W311. The :mmaJ:n:n1′ ‘ g extent of .1 acme 17

g:u’ixfas,___vi:§ fheir 1}C)SS¢i’:S$i{)1Ei. in the year 2001 the app-elmt

made” application for mutating thair name on the basis of

Vthejgiegistercd safe deed of 1924. After eznquiry, fhc Tahsikiar

___::§icIf:i6r;i their name and enfsrtud the name: of the appeiiaxats,

which under was ecanfixmed by the Assistant Cemmissiauaner in

k/%%

appeal and that Deputy Commissioner in revision. when the
said orfiam ween: chailcnged before the learneti SiIlfil:{fJ~-V,}:1′;§:# l.3fiu, he
has rzighfiy set aside thtme carriers and
entries in the name of the 1’cspon¢i;:1;1Vt§_.’

is chailcztnged by the apjpeliants baftaxt ‘ V ¢
4: In this Cami; btmgh of t1p¢uments–‘V–w}1ich fifeie lit:-fig

pmduccd in the cariier pmcéesifiigs héivs “i:s&I1 . §)I'(:!VV¢Z\i11()t5d to
Sh0W the mutafion efitries game of appellants’
g1*a.nc:i-father, father and fiéievant years, The

fiaid ¥i0C1uuéijv£’;_’;._s€*e1ve’ii£2_i «before firm Tahsilda:r, Aamisiant
Commissifinfitr er. t}:a¢i:§’Eb)§i*;’p1,fi’i3} Cgmmissiencl’ or {wen before. the

ieamled it is in film-3e cixcnmstanzrgtcza, the ieaxnezd

” prucxivfied an the assumptien that for the. first

2091 at mqtlmt is made by the: appeilants to

flame 011 the basis of the mgistcred 3313 deed of

A}’§~324~,z vfiixerefore he held that fat: Tahsiidar had no juxisdiciion

tafiéictc the name cri éhe resporztzicnts whose name was enteltd

K far back as in 1963-66 as he had no jurisdictfiorx to go into

/.

123$ qucatian of titizzt. )’\//

Q\

E}!

If really for the first time an application made

in 2091 seeking far mutation entries in mspect Q£.f:1§;¢.’:§§éfieV6§;ed

of 1924, the ieaxgned Single Judge is

impugimssd order. But uBfort11na.E€§3jI;’ i

pxndtzoed before: us Shaw that onA:’th€:’.§$:asi.S.b’;:%A iiaes
sale deed in 1924, m11ta1:ioI1VB3’1r:’i:.::i’i::s itaamc’ ‘O1?’
Rangaiah in 1955~56f fln1:1’f«£iiiz::z1~5;:nt1’i:s were
made in the name 01′ his Afier his death, the
name of his vw!i:;:i;:-xv ¢fl1;¢3:l’¢3d- But the
Iespondeznia’ ;’a1_1V §l«gé;1ments which am new
p1′()ci1i;;f:3d__ –a1§: fabricatsd documents, which
wem n e:£v€:1; in at the same fime, though the

msggandenté fiffic finder a Icgistcrcd mortgage deed of

., ~ not pmduced mutafion entries in the

gfiéaLnd–fath¢r from 1922 to 1965-66. Aocnoxtiing to

them, fiat this pm-party under a partition dew and

Atheraitazmftéér mutatiam entries have bmn made; Mutation order is

xatqtiavailabie. Subscqnamfly that” name finds a place: in the

‘-4

6, A partition dwd do not confer title. Partitian p1’e~
supposes tint: pr£:–cxistm:1t right in the pmpezrty. That title is
distributsd among the shaxers. We have the in

favour of the appellaxlta’ mmastmm and the

basis for tha mutation envy in favqfgxr of u in

the czircumstanccs, we are of “d§11a1;’

appropriate to relegate the pm’-fig-:3 tA¢:V:-”
direct them to pmduce an in their
Pfisscssiun before into those
documents andpass j b!1′.iil£i{fi1′ Section 128.

That of -justice: bmause: the parties are
di3pufifig..ti1e ,}:4r’I’J§1:ht*; documents cm which they are

mlyfigng, _.I:a filaf, of the matter, we pass the following 011131:

passed by the learned Singie Judge, Deputy

Cfamgfiéissianen A$sistc;z.nt Commissioner mad the Tah.si!da;r

H hereby set aside.

1:39! ~

The Tahsildar is ciirected to take up

giving apporlunity to both the panm’ mf;§mzu~ [V .%A¢é’%a::’_¢%T:hg%%.V
doamzents on whidr. they

to pass appropriate 0756′? Ffia.~..

and 12.9 of the A:::i,~ '2

Both the' briqfi deafiy
seitfipg   numbers, mm of

{A3  Cmiey-ad.    befiim.

Sd/-3
Judge

Sa? as
Iufigg