WP 311€3€>,2G08
ma THE HIGH com'? or' KARNATAK_}§;*--- I
CERCUIT BENCH AT D}iARWA.i); _ : ' L.
DATED Tms THE Tm 132301 r~§§}&'£&13:§RV:§2e.Q:gL"' ' _
BEFQRE ' ' V *
THE HOWBLE MR.JUsT:t:«I2§V:"'RAM I£«E(§_Pi2*;I;%' Rvigzgjm
wm' PE'r1T:m{r":%Na.:--é12;d6i:2.Q§)a. (GM-CFC}
BETWEEN: ._
Shri Maruti, 'filiiléékepiaa,
Age: 46 yeg.r's,"Még'eif, (}c_c.;_;figgIic:'u1t,ure¢»
R,' 0: Tég.' D'ha:;x%ad. Petitioner
(By Sri.
AND:
1.
Shri Balappfi; .S’$I:La:i3.kVé:r:z-lppap Guiedkoppa,
Age: «Majar, 00¢: “AgI’ict11ture,
Ri€;.:.. Ammmbhavi, Tq;”& flist: Dharwacl.
3:) ffihankarappa Guledkoppa,
2′; gé: . _ I*4ia7j’ex’_; . “Agriculture,
R] :3: £{usugaj_ Gui, Amminbhavi,
Tq. 8:; Dist: ffjhaxwad.
Uhvéppa, S/0 Shankarappa Guiedkoypa,
‘* A.ge: “S34 years, Gee; Agriculture,
R/’o;-Kusugal om, Amminbhavi,
Tq. 6:. Dist: iiiihanvad.
. Ashok, S/o Shankarappa Guledkoppa,
Age: 38 years, Gee: Agiculture,
R/0: Amminbhavi, Tq. $5 Dist: Dhaxwad,
5
WP 311062098
5. Smt.Kamalavva, W/o Ramappa Amyer,
Age: 56 years, Occ: Househoid work, L-
R/0: Hosur, Tq; Bajlhoagal, Dist: Bclgaum;—.,.__ ‘
6. Smt.Nee1avva, W/0 Hafi.umanth’=Gou,da1fkudé1f,’
Age: 35 years, Occ: Household Wt’;-rk,’v. A’ ” . –.
R] 0: Dodawad, Tq: Bajihon-gal,
Dist: Belgaum.
This Writ ;)etition_isr. uI_1Cier A1’£..icies 226 and 227 of
the Constitufion of India Vpraylngio ‘”‘qi:saS”h. Annexure ‘A’ the
order dated 11.9.2008 passed by Judge (Jr. D11.)
Dharwad not to*procec§.:i’ ‘with as the jurisdiction is
ousted in pu1’s1::3.13%3e to R<:f<5:.' ms_A;fii I'/'W. Section 9 of
Thisi'wzif* G13. »f:§r pre}1m' 1'1:1a.ry hearing
this day, tht:,C0u:j§ m:~1c'£'e: tiic«–fQ11ow;ing:
% The aefefigéat 5.3.: in {).S.No.321/2007 on the file of
mg" Civil Judge (Jr. D11.) 3:. JMF-'C, Dhaxwad,
oréer dated 11.09.2608 posting the suit to
hear arguaents on adclitional issues aiong with other issuss
a£Lthc;"£i1;11e 9:" final disposaz of the: suit, has presented this
" Vpefifiion under Article 226 of the Canstiiution of india.
2. The case of the petitioner is that an extent of 2 acres
12 gtmtas of land, out of 5 acres 29 guntas, in Sy.N<:-.129 of
E 7%
. _ Z?té:_S}}:¥.n:ients * . L'
W13' 311062098
: 3 :
Aminbhavi vfllage when granted in his favour pursuant to an
application under Section 77A of the KamatakaT’,:.”Land
Reforms Act, 1961, by an order during Dec:embe1§~’20{)u5__’f_£:§.éi§g¢
the pefifionefs exclusive ané absolute .¢
statement refuting the claim of
flaming of a preiiminazy issuc; raver
suit, and hence the Trial not V’
the consideration of sa_izi{“”iS@.if1’@ ‘a.1,<)ng xx%ith'"thc mam'
issuss.
I11L{iAVsV ,:;§*i:f;21l;»vfiy,»j th§’p,e’titioncr ané the other parties to
O.S.No.i$2:1:} 30$}? of the same family. Thfi
pkeagiifigs éd 3io£V di’scl(V$sc the exisfxnce of an earlier partitiozi
gaaembers of the: joint family of which the
of the members and it is not known as to
Whether’ to {)1.G3.19?4, that was a partition of assets
the” family. in the absence of material, it goes Without
Sayifig that it is for the petitioner to estabiish, by cogent
__fi§VidCI1C€, that the land granted in his name, under Sccfion
‘?”?’A of the Act, was to 1:113 exclusion. of all the members of the
jezzxint fainiiy.
WP 311062808
: 4 :
4. Although the order ixnpugned is czypfic and dcees
not assign reasons or findings, izevertheittzss, the
stumbled upon the correct decision. In the ¢
evidence that the petitioner is the owner of thfifiszgit _«
property to the exclusion of othiir
family, no exception can be §a_ken icy like ordéxf A-léf
Court to hear the prel1mm’ ‘ ‘main Vi
i$su<:':.
\&?Iit1§c§ti(Jii1:__i$ a,;:c§:xi;1;g1§g mjected.
Sd/-E
Judge
‘ V V. K.1n$*f’..