1N THE HIGH CGURF OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH
GULBARGA
DATED mis THE 218? my OFf.;5.§;,'»f}LIS_4I'H§§C$8 "
PRESENT %
THE HONBLE MR.
%,,4g_1~zI3 % i
THE HONBLE MR. Gowm
M
BETWEEN: : 'V «V '
SHEKAYYA sgio §ff{AR'NfiYYA_'"' A
55 YRS, 03:3: 'A.8:.Rif3_b"L1'i.3RE,
R/C} sAvALAG;(:&3},,
TQ & DIST_(3I.IL}3AR{3A}'~ '
"~ ' * ' " APPELLANT
(E351? 'SR1 vPi§$V'E2EN mum RA:K0'I'E, ADVOCATE)
* 1
GULBARGA-,ABY ITS SECRETARY.
Y ':2: 9EER.¢.,I$?A s/0 NAGENDRAPPA
jg §{MOR, occ; AGRICULTTJRE,
/0: SAVALAGI (B),
':?Q & ms'? GULBARGA.
SHIVALINGAPPA 3/0 NAGEINDRAPPA
MAJOR, occ: AGRICULTURE,
%//A
R10 SAVALAGI (B),
TQ & DIST GULBARGA.
RATNABAI W/O BHEEMSHA
MAJUR, occ: AGRICULTURE, '
12/0 SAVALAGI (B),
TQ & DIST GULBARGA.
SHARANABASAPPA S/O Ii3HEEMSi~IA
MAJOR, occ: AGRICE}I,.,TURE;' .
R/O SAVALAGHB}, ' _
TQ & DIST GULBARGA.
SHIVALINGARPA_S;'O EBHEEBM-SFJ?'gV._ V' % "
MAJOR, occ:$ Agv3R1cUiL'1':1RE,
R/Q SAVAE;AQE*'1(.B3;'"--~._ I
TQ 85 DIST €'a§J'L.-EARGA-. ~ '
SHAN*i?AP_PA S;*'C«v._8I~{E'ENivSEiA
MAJOR;.0CC: AGRiCULT[}}S:E,
R/O SAVALAGI {B),",' A
TQ &,1:):s'r GULBA--R(;A.'~~*'
I x 4/ »s/ 0% VSHEHWKAR RAO
.MAJOR, 05:0: AGRICULTURE,
wok :~3A'afALAC:;1' 13),
$9" 5; n1s*;*% .G{3LBARGA.
AM B;%R;§{)"S;/O S RAG
% « . % ~ % %%%%MAJ0R, bee: AGMGULWRE,
' 3 R/.SAVALAGI (B) ,
_ " '.£'Q_&;{.--'DiS'I' GULBARGA.
x :33: s.s. KUMMAN, AGA)
... RESPONDENTS
% M ..A(B’Y.SRi H.112. MALI PATEL FOR R2 TO R7)
(1% SERVED BUT UNREPRESENTED)
WRIT APPEAL IS FILED 13/8 4 OF’ THE
HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE c)iv2D1?’5;i-2_f
PASSED IN THE WRIT PETIPIGN N<:).3009/2003 QATED
15/O6/2004. ,
This Writ Appeal coming on for »heeJ*i£:}?g ;
SREEBHAR RAG, J, delivered ths fo11Qwing:¥.__
The appellant ( heIvci11aftr:§"c§311¢d""_'V'.ffjgf;pgtifif§iiér '; nas
filed an application in Fqrxn N04?" bearing
Sy. No. 23/ 1 measm~k1§gALfwi%9 1e5%V%'jfgin~;t.%g§,' Sy.N0.23/2
measuring 14 acres: measuring 15
acres 5 village in Gulbarga
Taluk and 'The: gands were subjscted to
afienation by i on; favour of Chandrakarath
l<ivaE;Vi4.r?::.\;i7:':1:i:« to Nagenérappa, father of
:22 3:13' Sri Bheemesha, husband of 41:»
wgfigmmt and {am Tor 225 :9 R7.
fi’1’i’f3i,fi1ai by its order dated 14. 13.9? has gmnted
F rights. R8 and R9 filed Writ petitiun in W.P.
W8. The occupancy rights granted in favour of
“piét.:it;.i.’§:2xnar is set aside and remanded the matter to the
Tribunal. In {.1116 second mund, 3316:’ hearing, the
rejected Form No.7 of the petifionar who filed the
in question. I _
3.’i’he iand owner — Shankar Rae
favour of Chandrakanth kivade who non” ».f’£%l”!Ai’:(2)’i;.§,1,T’VV()f;’
Nagendrappa and Bhefimasha, ‘R2 of
Nagendrappa. R4 to R’? are L..refR8 and R9,
the children of ShaIfl(;ar_:R.:a_.0 ‘Q16 time of
sale, on attaining %m¢d” Q,s,k R5129/2/1962.
The said suit i11t6″R.S.A.N9.410/1972.
The sale efi’ect:cd’i»:_> the cf the property ‘1.e., the
share; of R-«8V .R~–9.V tie. bad. The half share of the
” Rat) to Nagendrappa and
leameé Single Judge finds 1:hai::~
Vii) in i:”1’1e: proceedings, thére is Iii} Whisper af
in favaur sf anyhmy muchiess this:
fxeiifibncr.
‘ ” spot inspection I’€p0I’t relied upon by the
getitioner 1:9 pmva his cultivation is iz1~aé.1::1issi?3le
because the spat inspecfion is not done .,
Tribunal, but by the Tahsildar which is nqfi E
law.
3) the lease deed relied i)et’1ti01;:1€;”i ‘
Marathi language. The is
either before the ~-writ’
Hence it is held is un-
undcrstandafiisé ‘ A , ‘a. piece of
avidencg .. h. .
4) the petitionégf is rights even to
the extent of Bhesemesha, since
thcfi: is land is tenanted and as
sii<:t}:1¥ the Government for @3111; of
_ Qr:.thnr€;ughV.§:<3risid¢:'a1Einn We finci that mjecting ths
"iii; language as um-«understandable and no
2 is an incorrect view. The Cmxrt shzmlci
1*;a*_EéLVfaLs1§éé partias to furnish the translated cepy of the
With mgard ta csmcession made by Nagendmppa