- ....... I' :1:-nu 'I-ll E\l"'lI\l1I"|II\I\I'\ "IQ"
.- HIGH COLRT OF KARDIWKA FHGH COURT OF KAHVATAKA HIGH'
1N THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
cmcurr BENCH AT GULBARGA % MA
DATED TI-HS THE 17m my 01:' SEPTEMBEi§'~2d{)8«. _ T @ Y
BEFORE
THE I-ION'BLE MR. JUST-!§3E A..s.'B0P:
W.P.No. 19339/2o()*2%(n_n1N
s; 0- A'm,BsAr3~ . , V
AGE,I>'--AB0m* 1-EJYYEELRS,
' :2/0. KuRuKUrrr.a VILLAGE,
TALUK SEDAM,
- 3.31.: L.;BARCaA" DISTRICI'.
. .. PETYFIONER
RESPONDENT
,, .:%’I’HiS PE’I’i’FION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 85 227 OF THE
L
“5
cimsmmzou OF mam, ?RAYiNG TO-, QUASI-I THE ORDERS
10.2007, am) 7.11.2007 PSSED BY THE LEARNED CIVIL JUDGE
(JR.DN}., A1′ CHINCHOIA IN E.P.NO.5]0′?’, VIDE’. ANN-F, ma.
a(\n\¢n. I
……. . uvun! vr nu-uuvnlnlxn I-IIGI1 OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH C
This Writ Petition coming on for Pmliminaxy hwring in
‘B’ gmup, this day, the Court made the folIowi.ng:-
Ollfifi
The petitioner is before this
writ of certiorari to quash the ojrdgr détcfi 29.
7.11.2007 passed by the at
Chincholi, which is impugzaezzjat so mepemon.
2. The possession of
the land to an extent of 1
acre 36 Chincholi Taluk, Gulbarga
District. in the respondent hcz’c’m is
saigi to na~ge;§inautfited 0.S.No.208/98. me suit was
The said suit came to be
p1aintifi’ therein i.e., the respondent
herein hm questioned the same m a
RA No.15/02, but had failed it; the same.
I the decree mlder filed execution petiam in
–E,I5.”§sIh§.IO5/2007 seeking to execute the judgment mad decree
the Civil Court The petitioner herein is arraigned as tbm
1;
“‘ KARIMTNM HGH COURTOF KARNNAKA HfGH COURT OF KAINAEKA HIGH C
su–uno1w-Ina-Il\r\ ¥’!l\Il”‘l U!’
judment debtor in the said execution petition. The decree
holder sought for possession of the suit schedule”
Subsequent to the disposal of the suit
appeal, the petitioner herein taking s.
brought by way of insertion to the 2
Act vide Section 77-A filed 1510.79};
Commissioner claiming of the
very same land in the suit schedule
property. B The as the
landlord in Commissioner
after aetggswas of the view that the
app1ieatios;*«I’i’ledVbygtiiesfioefitioizer in Form No. ‘7~A is to be
allowed and ooeumncy right is granted in
the pgmioi1¢r;’i It is in that eontext, the petitioner
conizezidsi’i§I;e’_i.~E)1;ecufing Court could not have ordered
for securing possession inasmuch as the
land had vested under Section 44 of
on 1.3. 1974 and as such had subsequently filed
Egipplieimtion in Form No.7A. These aspects of the matter had
3 indicated by filing an objecfion statement before the
1
3?
“”‘”‘”””‘” ‘ “V’ ‘ *-vvnl Ur IWIMIHIHAA rllurfl LUUK! OF KARNATAKA I-HGH (
Executing Court. The Executing Court has not adverned to
these aspects of the matter but has only
there is a judgment and decree of the trial
mssed by the Assistant i
of and thereafter proceeded to -It
gr1ev’ anee of the petitioner that filedii
has not been eonsidered correct
perspective. V ‘
3. In order passed by the
Executingjvlcioiibt sjidieate that the Executilg
Court has refief oontenfion of the petitioner
herein Aitsiotant Commissioner has granted
of judgment debtor on 18.8.2005 and
as occupancy riglt has been made after the
decreed in favour of the decree holder. No
. i Court in a normal circumstance would
L«V§ie:§m1ed to go behind the decree. But in the instant
.i . V § requires to be noticed is that if the authority under
tile provisions of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act had come
is
– u-van -w-av-nan’: was
l\r’|l\lIl”|ll”II\l”\ llI\Jl”l QKJUKI Klr RHKWRIAM (
With the above observations and directions, the petition
stands disposed of with no order as to costs.