IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED Tms THE 19TH DAY 01+' NOVEMBER
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE_ R
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTiCE~..$.N.SATYAT§7ARA'{ANA
WRIT APPEAL No.58i7'%_DoF.. 2009' {LR}
BETWEEN :
1.
Smt.SarufuIm_isa,
W/ 0 Basha E:S.ab,_
Aged abolfi
R/a K0r;t1mareip'ét..,, R _
K. R. EXt€DS;1'0fl;3 V' Hclskote, ~ A 'A
R.iTl?.£iL."DIS'I'RICT.
Smtfihaataj Begu_m,. __ ..
W/0 A1}abDaks'h.i,'f =
D/.0 Bash3,_Sa.b:,- '
Aged 'about' 3'7' Years,
3 3-Kori: marapéf;
» ' K,R..EL':te{1SiQn, Hoskote,
RURAL DISTRICT.
'R ' Smt-Sh'a}LI'x':C'R::a,
I')/0 V'-late 'Basha Sab,
Aged about 35 Years,
' =R/ a Kommarapet,
' v __K_AIR.Extension, Hoskoie,
BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT.
(By Sri.P.M.SiddamaJ1appa, Adv.
for M / s.My1araiah Associates, Advs.)
.. APPELLANTS.
X/.
1. The Land Tribunal,
Hoskote Taluk,
HOSKOTE,
By its Chairman.
2. Sri.AhaIe Suvm athul Jamath,
Jamia .1\/iasjid, _
R/a I)ar_}eepet, Hoskote, H ''
By its President,
Sri.P.B.Syedu Mohammed, _
S/0 Beeransab, ' ~.
Aged about 65 Years.
3. Smt.Padma'oa.i,
D/o Shamsing, w ~ _ --.
W/o Narayana Singh, V V
Aged about 44- Years;
R / at Raj aputaté.pet:;t_
Hoskote__T0'wn1;1fV_IiIos1£0te-,._ ._ V .
BANGALORE ,RURAI}-efI).IS'5'.m(3:T; .. . RESPONDENTS.
(By '
' _ AGA for I'{"<,_]1-"s "
V. _Sri.K".G,'Sadasf:iVaiah,
0 Ad.v,__fo1jR--2,
SitmjN.shash:ka1a, for
T _ "'-.tV';Ci<{a11drappa &
" ._ ""A_a,s_oc;iates, Adv. for R3]
*__=i=_=l=_=l=_*__*_*
T1;1ista;pI:)ea1 is filed under Section 4 of the Constitution
inriia, praying to set aside the order passed in
'*--W;P.No_,.26140/2003 dated 29.01.2009.
This appeal is Corning on for Orders this day, the Court
V f L' ' A _ '4 delivered the foilowing:
JUDGMENT
An. application in Misc.W.No.8’7()/2010
on record by the proposed respondent the:
application is not opposed, it ispva1lo\7i:fedi:”fippellants to
the cause title. VA _ _
2. The appellants haveppppreferrecip appealchaliengirig
the order passed by the to set aside the
order passed occupancy rights
in favour of tfie the matter back to
the Tribtinafi ‘lord: »e.Vcl0n’s’ide’ratior1. Subsequent to the
order, the appellants filed an application requesting
Qoiurtii to gran–t…..«an interim order preventing any
land in question. The said application
me be’.di’srrii.ssed by an order dated 09.02.2009 on the
-4.l.l’_j’:v..«.4’g’r0und that the writ petition is not pending. Under these
A ‘–ci1’cu:n:sfl:tances, he has preferred this appeal.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants submit that he has
no grievance in so far as the order of remand is
His grievance is that as the Land Tribunal is
and as the order of the Land Tribunal
learned Single Judge, respondent N:cs.2[_”to
change the character of the
and therefore it has l)ecoz’t1e3 toiiprefer this
appeal for the aforesaid ll ‘ l
4. We have the parties. It is
not in disdute that tévhatelfefcoristruction existed as on toda
in the land _equestio191._ Dfssession of respondent No.2.
‘The is odflly-…elat1niI1g possession of the agricultural
‘Ucn’d.e’Il’ circumstaltces, till the claim and counter
decided by a competent Court, both the
parttes sfhatl not put up any constructmn tn. the vacant land
A =.171o’;f ‘c_1_1t}and remove the existing trees in the land in question
X/,
and that would meet the ends of justice. Hence, we pass the
following:
0 R D E R
The appeal is partly allowed. The order__’o:f
Single Judge remand’ing the 1I1atte1_i »Ai»e.._eon1€imie’d}» ‘However; .
both the parties shall maintain stat1:1’sV
shall not put up any construelion~.._in va.gant”1:af1d,”:which
forms part of the land .glispute,–.$o”aJaso they-~sh’all not out
and remove any tree in the adjudication of
the dispute b€l.W€{i’};3:V’Lj’lT1€Til’bfilfdftf -th’e’_jeo:njV:e{er1t authority.
‘,l wl aaaaa 35/;
JUDGE
Sd/5
FUDGE
