xii 'ram HIGH COURT or KARRATAKA A1' sanauogn
aated this the 26th day of March, 2009 V'
PRESENT _. Q _
THE Horrnm HR. wanes N ' ' 'A
AND I J :
TI-IE aonrnm mmmsmcm kg? VA V'
WRIT APPEAL NO'§V;?,$:.[""30O8 (LR)
B EB"; _ ._
Chikkamuneppa, V
3.10 fiymxspa' "
Y1"-3 yaears, Somafiéa' f_ _. 3
Mtlnzgamaila H6b__Ii:,;V. .' V.
Chintamanifi-3iuk;;~'_ " ._
K()I31'[}i$'t"1'i{3f./ . . x'3I:,; .. APPELLANT
(by Sri .m,;
AND; "
,._1. Tm; Lam: Tr§::mg;,_%« _
. fihintai 31:3.
' E3: Vitaflhairflian.
* z~éa:.ayaV na'
Since §Tie;..';d.'~V'by legal mpmsentafiwzs
'2. Srinivasappa,
S10 late. Narayanappa,
Major,
3. Smtflammma,
F)/0 'lat: Namyanappa,
Major, 1 '
4. Smt.Ven1catalakshn:aa%, _
D/0 kite. Narayanappa, V
Major,
Respondents 12 to 4 .. . _ V «
Residing at Somayajak{hJa5ii,” ‘
Murugamafla Hobii, ” V
‘I’ai1ik,_
. Y.R.I.akslm:iiap9éi;””3′.._ _
3/0 we Y’,:s:.Ra:gaaia2;,<., ., ' '
Major, "" -. 'L
New 'wor_l::inA:g" as ..R;£., –
Mmgana Hobii’, V’
Srrinivasapura Taltik; _ .. RESPONDENTS
(.51
{By S;;};tt;A.D.Vija;§a§_, Ga-vernment Adwacaut filo!’
‘~ ..§§cs1:3Qf}dg¢;;f I ‘ ….. ..
7 V Ree::pm;d_enp:_42¢_,o 4 service held Eillfliciflilt
‘
airshi-
“””r1us: “\z::?:t Appeal is filed under Section 4 of the
V§{aInat£fi4:a_’3~High Cotlrt Act praying to set asidct the order
” in the Wfit Petition 910.129 18]20{}S datfi
LL/.
_ éiffive ggxrvey” numbers. One such item was
“._vSyv.;Na_,75.,A_v*,’§jé*’»_an order dam 24.10.1930, the Land
.of f0{1;:” items. The order did not menticm anything
«.Sy.§kr.7.'”3. The petitioner aim slid not bcthcr to find
wixat happened to his claim in respect of Sy.No.75 301′
This Writ Appeal (homing on for Admission ”
Kumar J.. dclivcn:-d the following: *
J E D G E E E T
The appellant has preferizjsd A’
challenging the order passaed by.___m.e
who has declined to interfere _m-1:4,: by the
Land Tribunal ” in respect of
Sy.No.?5 in faV{)”i1iT'()fi’ht§:.i’t:’&”;’1L3(::}iI1(:1€21§I’i’So
2. ” ggiacmdmgs is land
bearing 15 gtmtaz-3 situate at
Somayajajpalfi, The petitiamar — appellant
fikzd Form may 9n”2c§’; :1. ism claiming occupancy fights in
Taluk granted ocacfupancy rights in
1,/.4.
V. Aétppligfififin was not ailewed. However,
–._has. been ganteei in favour of respondents
“.i:€tSp0l’Ild€};fiif3 and 3, the petitioner challenged the said erder
~e-23. 1 1.2003 by preremng a writ petition before this
The learned Single Judge declined to eilfiertam the
did he challenge the said order on the ginund that Sy.No.75
is not granted 130 him. The second respondent also
an application for gent of occupancy rights _
several items of land ineluding Sy.Nof’»7§.’ ” =
granted except Sy.No.7S, against
appeal to the Karnataka
which also upheld the cycle: of
the said order, he prefexvraeclrg. this Court.
This Caouzrt set agggg m%omgof igibunm insofar
as declining ye.» fespect of Sy.No.?5
and Land Tribunal my
flesh the petitioner opened his
eyes. He fer impleadment bcfizrre the said’
2 gant of occupancy rights in favour of
U2″
3’¢;$p¢;f(it”«.Qf__vthe said land is stiii pending
the Tribunal. Ag rightly pointnd out by
‘VI_’»hez’£:f”c:17e,V.l}_if V he is really aggrieved by the nozn-mam: of
rights in respect of the said land, the petit;n:I:te’ 1′
_.._ “-iruwjgfiht to have approached this Court in the ymr 1980. He
that the impuged order passed is contrary to law, 3
and therefore. requires to be set aside. The _
Judge failed to properly appI=eciat1eAm these-‘V .4 ‘w
cemmittead a serious error in Iejectinfgtheé j
-1. Per contra, the C’vg£}§v’$_Z£’I1II1¢3lfvi§A A.£i”%i’0C3’t:3′ ‘
311I3P’0I’ted the impugned order.
ES. Fran} the j efmputg: that
the petitioner di¢:l p-Lgt ocmupaiicy
Tights 33 far 3:: 197 ‘ l1v1 ‘f;-:$P5t:t of 4 items,
By an order dated
24.1o.1§3o%–m in respect of sy.No.7s.
That does claim for grant of occupancy
the Judge it is deemed to have beau nejechad.
uh/,
solely on the grczmncl of delay and Inches. We ‘
to interfere with the sad’ order of A K V’
Hsnce, the appeal is dismissad. V
In preferzing this appeal, tfiérfi is 3 days.
In the c:irc.m:nstzmoes, fiverido justification tn»
madam the delay.’- Hence’; “§».A:.*E/
“””
Sd/-n
Iudge