':
|'%
IN THE HIGH comm' op KARNATAKA AT
DATED THIS THE 31-: DAY" 05' MARCH ma E A
Ll lg',I.a'l ".3 lg',
IJIJI' \Il.\..IJ
mm HoN'i3L'E MR
wan' PETITION No.1o2712ocrs(KLR_r2zg,I:g% IE
BETWEEN :
8/o.Ramappa Shandrl,__
Aged ab0ut50;*¢m. :'
I2/at. .L;.,1..1...1a, ' EA
Disuicj; E E ...PE'l'fl'1ONER
L Adw-I
AND E
L
..... ..
' 2; ;'1'1"I'x:e'Vilia'=3gr'.:' E§A,mountant.
' 1315;, fieiavmnm,
" §3jo.Ramappa shmdrl, _ i
A ' . %EEAgea aboutasyean.
E E 12.,h;-.Hu11r.-11, 'nr.,n.14_n_Ir_Ir..e;~i.,
Diatdct Belgaum.
...RESPONDEN'l'B
(By Sri.B.V.Mum.lidhl_I!'. AGA for R1 & R2)
92:-
This writ petition lo filed under Article 236, otthe
Constitution of India with a prayer to quash the .4
by respondent No. 1 dated 29. 11.2007,
vide Annexune ‘G’, and confirm the ME. N_d.4e2Q;0 “of
-.l’I_’l’ll _.II!__._ !l\…’I… -1- ‘I_’.I…’I_…-.–…’~
‘l”l’-..I.I__…I ru–_4- ~ …,… ‘ _
u.I..lUl.ll v p ll1|l.l.l£ .l’IU.fll!”-Ip I-HUI» ‘- ¢
perAnnexure ‘B’, certified by 2′”! _ ._ V
This Isvrit lpefition
hearing, this day, the Court
t QRQEW q
The land in ;%sy.1$Io.117ats;2 of Hulloli
vmage, Hukczfi According tn
” .-a-..e and
oocupancjr i in favour of the
petitioner in equal measwe.
The is that-the 37¢ respondent has
deed in favour of the
% memes said deed, a Wardhi was given to the
i it _who on the basis of the same
the name of the petitioner.
I2. Aggrieved by the same, the 3″! respondent
A _p_1fe_ferred an appeal before the Assistant Commissioner. g
/%’
E
<1
"ii
E
E
93
§.
fia
fixctcetuu 21.: uotumuu uunnx.
ln3lI
It is the case of thepetitloner that when the
lfwa Ttfifdfl’ ” ._
compromise was into iiie. 1′ ” 2
Compromise Petition, the *
However respondent No.3 terms
nl-‘ H-an nntn 1%! run mi*s’n’%” Afihrtf fn
IJ’-I. …… …….1..’:v..”.z-.i$ p-;’….,.’.’…….7. at-_~.-3 3-_-…. ………. …..
Hence, anotixee before the
Assistant the mutation
entry. .. dismissed the
appea1:V1..,pn– Second is not
the saztd coder, the petitioner
**’-;-‘*-”~” ‘””~*- tr.-. D-..pu*.y ona.
d _ bommioaioner, regmd to the foot
“there is a serious dispute regarding the
2’eIin§ju1ehme11t- deed vent! the compromise arrived at
Vt the petitioner and respondent No.3, accepted
.-_– .n.¢a–.4l ‘II—1u_6–Ln’ I-Ina. a-nun-II,’-3.-an C-an I-an–. “CI
1. UH LOU “.1 [R11 3 .
…e.i.:-.g the .A.et.I.ie*..ent r.ar=m…__n=+-.-of-na-r t
appeafing for file petitioner submits that
is a88rievcd by the setting-aside ofithe K ” o .
5. I have perused tl1t:’T.i_ 1 ‘mp_|18Ilt’-£1 by ” L’
the .DepI..ty C.’o.m..mi…eit*.-nr.r aewek! the
of revision. A spec1I1c”‘ ‘ by the 3″‘
respondent stating failed to abide
by the by the elderly
persons “of. appeal was preferred
mfm Aeeiei.:a.i1t. \ Tm question
whether deed could be acted upon
onewitneutoftjiton oeittgeeexegioterea document or fol’ that
is of the compromise pet.itlo- n have been
lV3,«,wr’uiV§”t’1’f__e.::11eti1:ione1′ is a matter, winch its to
‘ , i’ no-Eh ii} on (‘Boil (‘ant -IaI_l- one-:3 nngtglvamlunluu filo.’
a. uxvu ‘MUHII. fill” ‘U-ll.-fll.Il.[y U115
%% 5 court oannot embark upon an enquiry or this
%% The impugned order passed by the Deputy
Commissioner cannot be faulted. There is no merit in
this petition. l
. 5 ..
Petition stands rejected.
5. Mr.B.V.Muralidha.r.. learned %
Governmcnt Advocate appeaxingibuf. K V’ ‘ ;
and 2 is pcrmittcd no fiic mania
1’¢_n_1_r wagkg,
HHHHHHHCHHH–HHHHHH———————-
‘E
9-
£52
(D