Ningegowda S/O Doddannagowda vs The State Of Karnataka on 11 September, 2009

1 W.P.37732/95

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 11?" DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2009

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MRJUSTICE H.N.NAGAMOHAN--'.i§ASg::  O'

wRIT PETITION No:37732,*1*9SS(Q3;    

BETWEEN:~

LINGEGOWDA, S/O DODDANNA GD'w,DA.V 1
SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS:  

1(3)

S L YASHODAMA, AGE 4,2YEA RS,   .
R/O No.61, 3'"? MAIN,,..4"f*f'--CROS.S,"  
3'" STAGE, GQKLJ_L, r{IYSoRE__ *  I

1(5) S L DIwA«KAR~, 

OCC: AGRICIJLT=._JRE,= _ 

R/O. SRINIVAS Ac3RAHA'R,

POST: 'KIRANGOOR, ,
S-RI'RA-I\IGA,PATNA,""MANDYA DISTRICT.

 'L I EELA\7ATr,:I, AGE 38 YEARS,

._v'v-,I_0 DT.Rl-\MA'KRISHNA,

R/_o MA.D:£3x-UR, MANDYA DISTRICT.

S L SDRESH, AGE 36 YEARS,
~ Rio SRINIVAS AGRAHARA,

A RIRIANGDDR, SRIRANGAPATNA,

VIVIANDYA DISTRICT.

..PETITIONERS

dwx



2 I W.P,37732l95

(BY Sri. T N RAGHUPATHY, Ac!v., FOR 1(a) &
Sri. F v PATIL, Adv., FOR 1(a) TO 1(c) ).

AND:-

............._.......

1 THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY THE V
SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
REVENUE DEPARTMENT, A 
M.S.BUILDING,

BANGALORE ---- 560 00;.

2 THE LAND TRIBUNALI I ._ I
SRIRANGAPATNA TALU!(.,_  '

SRIMNGAPATNA,    
REPRESENTED S'§'_.ITS .CHAIRNA.N. 

3 Smt.LING.AMRNA,Wit)«.CHIKkA"'LINGAIAH,
SINCE IDAECE-f\SE¥3+ =SY-HE.R  I

D.CI-I:i'i(K!5INi'JI1:\V'§;/'Ci:DQVDIDANNA GOWDA,
MA3OR',..R/"A MANDYA, MANDYA DISTRICT.

SIRESPONDENTS

'-E:BIYRS.ri;TRR" BI'ASAT~.rANARAYANA SINGH, HCGP

FQRR1-.& R_2"&'Sf1'.YOGANARASIMHA &
Sri;-K. £33-IR1£),l-ji~.AVR, [Ad-vS., FOR R3)

  PETITION FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 8:

i."2'2?"»OF THECONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH

:  ORDER VIDE ANNEXURE -- C PASSED BY THE LAND

  TRIi:3,U'NAL, DATED 30.04.1993 IN SO FAR AS IT RELATES

TO THE REJECTION OF THE APPLICATION OF THE

 * PETITIONER FOR CONFERMENT OF OCCUPANCY RIGHTS
 ARE CONCERNED.

OM



5 W.P.37732!95

dated 17.10.1959, the RTC extracts in respect of the

in question specify the name of petitioner as

Further, the RTC extracts in respect of §y.No.}.'2z3/i:ahti::1'2V5 it  it

further specify that petitioner is in possessiiion ofthese"l'ahd«s'ii::Vi_ié

as Guthedar. The petitioner hassaiso"*-produced'?ti:e__re'ntV%

receipts said to have been execut:e'dV',v:b;r.V_vthe"33?respondent
as per Exs.A to A7. Exs.Az"s..._t':ca   'the paid receipts.
There is oral evidence of 'l.a'nd:':V".1o"vvners. The
Tribunal witho4i_it_':v  on record
committed an petitioner has failed
to prove   he dwas a tenant as on
01.03.1974i"a_n'd  to that. The non-

consideration of» the available oral and documentary

'ievidence  record has resulted in failure of justice.

Thie-refoyre}  order is liable to be quashed. The

R""'matter'*-ire€it.§ires.7~"to be remanded to the Tribunal for fresh

""'«ii.".d--i._sVposayl in accordance with iaw.

 -..V"Foru5the reasons stated above, the following:

dKK_



5 W.P.3'f732/95

ORDER

I) The writ petition is hereby_aiio_wed,–“W’

II) The impugned order

by the 2″” respondeiita-_. Larrd. ;:i”i”§,l)’UiE’iE.:vE’l’AiA”«:i_I’:”‘~CEi3ie
No.i_RT/116/1976~77 is_4_i:q’ues–h_ved. ~ I
III) The matter is re.rh’ar}déed2.ito’.tiieivfribunai for fresh

disposal in acco_.rt}a.n§:e ‘with is ” I

dh*