.1.
IN mm HIGH couivr or xnmmnxn AT
– mm; 11-as 1314;. 2″‘ DA! 92′ A9a1′;;”,’=–«2_cQa’
rm: Howam: MR. “J’!iSTICE
wan: “‘RPPEAL’.”‘N()fl.;2jéfl./2007V(‘KI5IiA)
2
1 .-<:.'.-'.A:=._, s/o %s:~:1%.m.sa!m-A "
63, mans, ;occ GRICIJI;-=1fURiEi'
Rip sazvw
EKUHHAPUR ~.1uW V V
aqmintiasiiffffl 'a
2 pr;n:<As:a1VsaIwaaoUnA PATIL
L : 'so I.v:.i»~..9.s,_ 03¢'—AGRICULTURE
-R/o Kk’mHEGULUND %
Tésmvcm, +1<o1,1mun
lv1l\HARA3HTRA"'
,_;gy%%%sx1 'VICE?-LYA R mummrenn. 9
WE. LAND TRIBUNAL
' ATHANI, BY ITS CHAIRMAN
BELGAUM
2 THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
B! 115 QEGREIARX $0 REVENUE
DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA.
D1Hdl(I".'l.|'I'.f\D'l'-," 'I
uruvuwi-uvnu 4.
f
.2.
1L0
CHALIDRABAI
W/0 BASAGOUDR VPATIL.
MAJOR QEC AGREE:
R/O SHIRAGUPPI . A’1’HP.NI
new .¢_-an an
Dl’a.l..IurLUl’I
4 SU’Nil””1″‘RiL
w/o xnmounn M-:11. _ ‘
55 mans.’ occ aousmuoz.nwoaxT :%%V ‘ ‘
R/0 ANICALL cHI!§K1@.DI.. % A
BELGAUM .V
5 ANNAPURNA’ ~~._ ” ‘V
we AA
so YEARS, cc: HOUSEHQI2fi.$¥QR{<
are .2-.!.=:1.%t.r.=–.'.:»:"»~…v» .s:aI.':¢L %
K01-smurszra .2. j' ~
6 RUSHQA Lmsounn" 3
%%%% V50'-xsznas'
OCC: 55333591'? WORK
RIO "'.Ei1L\VADEa.. "%sH1voL%
xonumqn, nmnansnwan
7 KANGHAN
.=:-em.-z
47 YRS} "" "R/0 K1-WATHE l3KAND,.. TASGAON
-i-n’n u’,ui I nlniinhn nugnnp
Sfiifiiiii iiiRT£HF\Ti’i. F\(?J\ i”C)R R-1 FINE 2}
~ -WRIT APPEAL. FILED U/’S 6- OF’ THE
,.HI€’:H COURT ACT. PRAYING TO .SE’.l’ ASIDE THE ORDER
PA38ED IN THE WRIT PETITION NO.4146O9/94 DATED.
‘ 26./10/2006.
_ 3
L §
.3.
THIS wan APPEAL comma on top. pamnmxunnv
HEARINQ rugs pnz, MANJULA cuannua. J. pmnxvzamn
T E FOLLOWING: – *n*.nn>
‘cue learned as-:.!_e.:~._sa.1’~~.V’;4?o,-r tag-
‘via haivé héarii
parties and have gone thro:uqh»_thja””s:f§fif*_
the learned Single.Judga,
2: ,1’n¢.a ggctg. and_nig;nf.u.-ngstanen:§V.:’Aqfi the case
are that lands and 66/2 of
rd. =.Vi11af.<jav..]n£V_ tel.-_-.!:;n – 1-.r_;-e
regiatgxén '" 'rihua' tnird raspan<§=-.:~.t.-
Chandrnb.§i.:"V;jnnni '_ iriicyishvietix-Léin-law». nffzar . 'fihfi
deanzh the third reapondent. –
becnmg "tna of the proporsty. It is
net L1n%4"'d.t.§:put'e A't;hnix Chandrabai in none other than
"i§:.:'i*na:_'.-.n,:dangh£ni.€."'""o'1' the Shivagouda .Pat1.1, the so
A The children of Shivngauda. Patil
[airs _1';'§tixran..i':I.ng the appeal.
1 3.. The learnod single Judge obaor.ved:_ than
" finer: are no lease document or -RTC records
subsequent to 1-3-1974 ta _ show that S-hivaqaudam
c,
/
'Gnu ma:"ai:n*–:rs isf tue parental huu-'.11! to assis-
–4–
Patil was cultivating the landa in question. with
this Vobsorvation, the learnad
proceeded to see how the contant’i§>naVA[.V i:fi1.%§d ‘k;y
each of the parties wouli.-d””‘re«.fle7gt _ ru>i1’V:vth§v–‘.£aétsV ‘<a:5'%
the case. According hef J
mother-in-law being» ea;1ci.VVTs»J.:n-'::A*.n§§""*'t:l*:6re wére
I
1
m La ma,mbg1_:_g Ln aftez the
fa-I
ands, on ..er= ~.-:eq::ea:,t,. 4.3.-.-V1′;-..t..er S..i’.’-.-.g-:-.ude-.
atii ‘vi’5 1:-;r:ki~n<j" afiar t.hé' lands rm their
W3
behaizffi; tg :h é1':VV,:""'liaving regard to the
conf.iV.c!atir:VeTau_:v»sl2'ir3_ father, she was: signing
téhatéfiéfi.-vVr§;:.§rd:§'flaked by him.
I..".-
Aug.’
_V ziéughifiars in case of used, especially in the
any male members in the matrimonial
housé} Apparently. no lease agreement is
fa:-afthooming to support the factum of tenancy.
us-
on 1-3-1974 or prior to that dat§’ 1n the
cult1vator’a column in the RTC would figg gauge to
tha benefit of the Shivaqouda PaE¥l. @§ fi§§ n9
good ground to inter£er9″withtt@eJfi§difi§é 6£uth§*.
learned Single Judge. 2 h’ I 2 AA’. uEL y A
Accordingly, tfiaiaygeél ;sxdigmi§§ad§
_ A, ._fl-_A § ‘
____ K ” Q
= ” ” V”~’ judge