High Court Karnataka High Court

Narsi Poojarthy D/O Manju Poojary vs The Land Tribunal Udupi By Its … on 28 May, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Narsi Poojarthy D/O Manju Poojary vs The Land Tribunal Udupi By Its … on 28 May, 2008
Author: N.K.Patil
9:.

IN THE H}GH COEERT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE WP.NO.4€}i6§' OF Zfifii

-1-

IN ms HIGH com: or-' KARNA TAKA A T SANGALORE'   
namxzs Tms THE 23:21: DAY 01? MAY, 2003  
BEFGRE _ _   %
ms HONBLE am JUSTICE' :g.1<.PA m.% I   

W.}?.NO_ 40169 015' 20a; {§;.*'I'L«.}i':.Ii}_ ..'   7

BETWEEN V 4_
1 NAR$| moaamav mo MANJU Paegkiav

MAJOR, §21Q.YERMAL OF TENKA ViLLfi;€3fE 
mow: m:_u:<: {ELK}    _  

" T . 4. '-- §gPET£_TtONER

(By an; VYASA RAG K SADVQCAf{E_...js_  '  V' " "

AND 1

.,...S

THE ma«r:» 5{R£8UNfi.L;. mow: av §TS"G3ri.R§'RMAN
uazm TALUK.{'£3_j('}   .
2 KAvu'z?<:<m.F<T§~+¥~«,'-'.  
o.mre:A:m.,:u PiQO&A_R":'«. '-- _ 
MAJOR, R!i'}.YEFiMA.L 05 TE:;~_4:<;A ViLi.AGE
i..F'.I}LE§?E TALUK{D.i<.)   '

  W»+~A 8?+.n.rx?""      é «
" . V 3.§Q.Rf3€E'J3A BHRT, L3§..|YARGOLi VELLAGE
»  'f-?'.._§§);%<.§§tii? ;:z:giHA,
EANGALQRE.
~~ V '1.  RESPONEJENTS

'  "--{Sféi; §x£'z%.DEéA SHQVANANGAPPA HCGP ma 521 & 4
_' .N{)T3€}E TO RESPONDENTS-2 AND 3 GESPENSED wrm)

‘ TH!S WP. IS FELED UNEER ARTECLE5 226 AND 22? OF THE

“»…?’4ST¥TUT£{3§’~E OF EMMA: PRAYENG TO: QUASH THE ORQER DATED

£36 TEE HEGH COKE??? C}? KARNA’FA§€’.A AT B§tNGA,LORE ‘9s”.P.?\E{I3.:£i)169 C}? 2091

IN TE-IE HIGH CTQURT CEF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE. \i’TP’.3′-E{},4£} 169′ OF 2116}

-3»

2. 1 have heard ¥eamed ceunsei appearéng fr/gr

petifioner and %earned Government Header appearing

respondents-1 and 4.

3. After sarefu! evaiuatien 31′ gm »3rig%:§a £. .%§£%§f:¢f&§s4–‘.i’.V

availame in appeai bearing

including the urder passed by

what it emerges is that, ‘the ;;’é? t1′:,’§.I/j’.”5;§’ ‘ii3_:,:.r2a$’fiéé mt
ccnducted prapar enquéry s3z§§f$«§3;.§fir:e ef the

reievant pmviséons’. ‘éf§.L. 9:.’he “!._a§?§::%’ R”ef,o_’r§€’3Ts~«Act and Rules

and the e1££§!%é’éTfi’cn.é;.f;}f p§:’t§§s net been regarded
and it has ‘Ap§Qiceeéa;::.i4’:.}i.i;e» a nun speaking arder
oantrary the Eééa-‘s_.{_’a’n% pfmgisions czf the Land Refarms

: !r;A..8;Eew sf net canduciing proper enquiry

stricfly Rule 17′ 51′ Land Refarms Rwes

féad wiffi’ $3-:§t.§c’fi.V’34 ef the Land Revenue Act, the arder

€2.35 tfiéz Land Tribunal, Udupé, cannot be sustained

~V%a; _t2€§ fie éfime is Qéable ta be 5 t as§de.

HE HEGH CC)i?R’T {BF KAREVEATAKA AT BANGALORE W,P.}\l’O.éG169 (iii? 13:96]

EN THE HIGH COURT GF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE. W,P.NO,4{¥169 (‘SF 208}
.5-

Regigky is directed to return the entire origivr3a £r._V

records to the Land Tribunai, Udupi, immediatehfl ” » A’

With these observations, wrifi,..pgtit§o§1′”‘fi}éc3 “b§I _g

petitioner sands d§sp0sed of.

3N THE HIGH COURT’ OF KARN2’~’aTAKA AT BA.’N{}AL(‘,)Ri?, W.P.NO.4€§1§£3 0? 200.1