-1..
13 ran :13 count or xaaum:axa.az nnuA;é§a .
DATED THIS THE G3m'flAY OF JuLy.§eQ§ "f"'"
9nns:nx_W,
an aouvama ua.ausr1é3 v;e§s52§ma: '?a'""
3R9. . . .
ran EQN'BLE ma.aus:Ié£f$.x.siézajmhaxasa
WRIT APpéga.NQfi2332x2§é5f;LR;
BETWEEN: .-V g""~IjV
'« Jsyfiu, MANGALORE 575 002, 0.x
1 9RABHA5NA§AK . a_ , ;. 'W
W/O 9AY3sznnHu'N3xgK_, _
HINDU, A933 ABOUT s5_¥Rs;
RxA»s:NpHU*¢oTTAG£.
EALKAR}7BAJAL,vKANKANADY 'B',
MANGALGRE;fDK;, --, _
REP BY HUSBAND A§D"3PA HOLDER
s DAEASZNDHU RAYAK,
5/0 s'nAMAyyA NAYAK
_;HInDU. Ara 66 YRS.
- "R(O SAME AS EBOVE
'.2"~ARuNAyBHAN3ARI
-3 Bio M Agnmna HEGDE
'. "HINDU; AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
%_R/Q'KUDUPADI RGAD;
M.B,CQM?OUND
. . . APPELLANTS
; }s§'éRI SANATH KUMAR SHETTY K, ADV)
2 "' paras 3;/3/2005.
.' :z"*a:His APPEAL COMING on FOR HEARING THIS DAY,
T ax, DELIVERED ma: FOLLOHING:
1 RAMA POOJARY
s/0 PUTTA POJARY
ADULT, PUDU VILLGE
BANTWAL TALUK ~"W-
DK
2 MUNBI POOJRRTHI
W/O KOGGU POOJARY
HINDU, ADULT,
PUDU VILLAGE
BANTWRL, DK '
3 THE LAND rRIaufiA:g'"
BANTRHL, DK _'.Vv
REP BY cgA:RMAN""~.;
4 STATE OF<KflRHATEKn_"aw~ ¢
REP BE Ira SECRETARY{_ V;
REVEfiUEyDEPfiRTMERT, ""
M s Buizaigs, =_'
BaN$AL0RE',v_=,'=
*V" '. ~u< ... RESPONDENTS
(By SR1 pfiasannfi v%a; ABV FGR R1 & 2
. sax SREEDHARWEIREMATH, AGA FOR R3 AND 4;
T’-‘f*Ta1$%iw3:: APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE
KARfiATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO 331 ASIDE was
oamza PASSED IN THE wnzr PETITION N0.9728-29/2095
me
This appeal is filed the
WP.NoS.9?28-29/2005 being aggrieved hy~§heebrae:
dated 31.3.2065, wherein’ the flearxzed
has declined to interferet’xefit_1; the passed
by the Land Tribun.e1.,’ .’T ‘D.3kshine VfKannada,
dated 25.11.2004, whér¢;fi}£hé,o§¢§9§ncy right has
been conferre-zit’ in ef.:’,t”;e:-gpcfntient 1603.1 and
2 on the. by respondent 140.1
and the f*e3per:¢3uéI1’t”V:No.2.
2. _ epelgtcattions were filed claiming
ocengéency rightv ef the land in Sy.No.129/3
Vineeetturilsnicg acres, wherein the 1″‘ respondent
a half acre and the husband of
the’—..2″”V_’v’ree;:endent claimed two and a half acre.
writ: petitioners were arraigned as owners in
“t_he_>_epplications seeking conferment of occupancy
and they contended that the land comprised
Sy.No.129/3 is a dry land and uncultivable of
We
-4-
being cultivated and is in personal posses:sione..V’ef
the landlords. The Tribunal after
the material on record, facts
elicited in the cross examinati’on’3ofvtize»
regarding the existence’:_o–£ the-.. easheeirlhAtnut-..t’3:ees’-L’
and palm trees and also –.Vrecei;3t’,v.’ held that
the applicants 1§§os;sAes’e.ien’~of the land as
tenants on Were.’Qt-“l’entitled to
conferment 3-of accordingly.
granted 15 of Rama Poojar,
the acres 20 cents in
favourflof ‘the hasband of second
responden”t«._o_V%%in lE?yl§i5Zo;31~29/3. Being aggrieved by
_ the..«.isaid order’~vpa_ssed by the Land Tribunal dated
landlords preferred WP.Nos.9728-
learned Single Judge, after
cons’«ide.rirag:”” the contentions of the learned
;for the writ petitioners, the learned
:”cou.ns§”e1 for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and the
doérernment Pleader for respondent Nos.3 and 4, by
detailed order held that the order passed by
U3
4. 1′
.5-
the Tribunal conferring occupancy right
of the first respondent and husband
respondent is justified and»~~does ‘=:Vcal”1.4.’_fA.f<§r it
interference in the writ T ~
accordingly, dismissed __writ ' . peti ..,Being'V . ll
aggrieved by the said ordelra_of–,V_»the."leernevd Single
Judge dated t«'_nei–".As}r'.=Z..t».VlA.pe_titione::s have
Preferred this apPe3r1r.:."\\V' 'l it
3. Counsel for the
&lC’c$u’nsel for respondent
Nos.12 ASA, who has been
directed tail-‘re h.o’t’j.L_ee for respondent Nos.3 and
:’AV’j;’he’v~l:i”earned Counsel for the appellants
subfit«itt.ed-that the land comprised in Sy.No.129/3
_ not?’ agricultural land capable of being
pxAcul.ti.£*ated, the mere existence of cashew nut
and palm trees would not make it an
uifegricultural land and the rent receipt does not
\SiJ~
“Court appeal. Accordingly, the
tn “‘r§:d/-
..1-
Mangalore. It is not shown that the rent’
produced before the Tribunal pertai–ns
other land and wherefore, the».
by the Tribunal that the laisol
land and was being cuiatvivatectit
to the extent for which has been
conferred, is Single Judge
having regard to material on
record has itheicirgthatV”‘:«the…V:order passed by
the “rioes not call for
1nterfere;nceEj_;n powers of this
Court ufrtit’ t The order passed by
the learneea..§ingie._audgett-nbttdoes not suffer from any
‘_VVerror.§;or t’illegua”ié.ty____as to call for interference
app.ea}.__ is
Sd/-3′
Judge
Sd/-2’
Judge