High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri G P Gangi Reddy vs State Of Karnataka Rep By Its … on 1 April, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Sri G P Gangi Reddy vs State Of Karnataka Rep By Its … on 1 April, 2008
Author: Manjula Chellur Swamy
BETWEEN:

1

 (By's:i7cyfi*5fi£§Iva53N, ADV.,)

M_keLh§g9:sm . 

.;-

IN THE HIGH counm or KARNAIAKA AT aasagnonz
nnmma mums THE 1" Bay or Apn;;; 25¢$7.
pamsznm :  'uu V «
THE HON'BLE MRs.Jugwxcm4MmfififiL$C¢#E:;uR. u
ARE  _; « '= w-  ~ '
was HON'BLE mnL Gu§TI§mV@ n3k§ia§a-afimM!' 
wax: A99m3@ n§,1§75}2do§j;fi)
sax G P a#fiéi"éEn5§

A9gp,A§gu:-57jxgs a
s/c%1mAm¢A ' A _

REA!§R CgcgKER%HALuI "w"
;MAHD1EAL HQBLI.

' EIl?'?JVT'.VI'l on -n"-I .-I- I Ehmo

n..n.-,_mumnnnnr~1;RA_ 

... PETITIONER

-_-__q

,STAIE"GE~KARNAEAKA
REP 5! I15 szcnsmafir

'=jnsPm., or REVENUE

t.lI"r" Pram -rmn EII"I"I"I"I'\

 .l'.I.'b.iJ.£."..I-o:I.l.oR.J..I:|l.1 nu.I..uuIN'\':'r

v'~§viEHANA sounnn

52......-.u.._ ...__.

'_nflNuAhUK£ 1

LAND TRIBUNAL
CHIKKABALLAPUR TQ
CHIKKAEALLAPUR TOWN
KOLAR DIST



:2:

3 SRI G S PANDURANGP. R-30-

AGED  63 1'35"

5/0 G SHAMPL RPLO

RIAT P..'i'a.".".I.'*--".'--*.."..'%.I.';a.§.."'..'--*aI'.aI.aI»
MANDIKAL I-IOBLI
Ci1'IC'I<a'~'-:51'-'-:11'.-I.n:'-':3.-"n.F':i TQ

KOLAR DIST  
(BY Sri v vmm AGA .roa"31  

THIS wan' APé;:A1._. £'II.£i:z _   on-' '-'rum
KARNMAKA HIGH COURT ACT' paAyzN_e"T1'o am ASID'£_i..THE

oamza mssnzp IN 'IflB,._...WIiI._Tv.._PETI.TIQt{ -V;go.2132.9/2-002,

DATED 27109/2oaj_s~»,%

THIS wan Az29s;.AiL"' ~ ma parmxmrmnr
amzres mas   'v_CHELLUR. J', nmzarsasa

THE FOIgLs'i%B§_I_i~!G:     

 """  tha applies-ntT who» has

 §,:;i%'*ug,£iet;;t1ng - occupancy rights-..a-t the-

hané=Za.!_ cg g:;g%~%.;g..;;a_%% 4-r;~;»L_:::;».1_, c_:;a;1g1gaIa.:.-4;; mm-.1:..-..

  "" is not in dispute that the landwin

  bearing .sy.No-..6 mcaaunes «I earn: 1
. 'and Sy.No.19 measuring 0- acres .30, guntaa
  of;_cnokkanaha111 of Chikkaballapun... '12:-1u1c,. weane-

L"«..éAati'tached "to the office of Shonbhog. -on coming



-3-

Office of shonbhog vested with the eénrermunent.
Under sec.8 of the Act if there be any

tenant in occupation of the   .4_4,s

entitled to claim tnegrignt  to.' 

under the Act. Apparently}; "tiii _"1.974V,'v"i'i;'1:§:'--§¢,iaim"' J

whatsoever came   'In
1974, the ap1;e11ant___ifl"Eiletl  claiming
occupancy r1gh'teA' that einee L971 his
::a..... is shot.-m   column.
i'erm'No.7, statement of the
appeliantliiiatnd  in the writ petition,
1157.9 not.iVo'e':'that: in his oral evidence before

the' tribuna;1i.,*'_k"_.he never came up wi -11 the

   fa her, he continued to be a tenant.

 fie' 'hat also admitted before the tribunal that he

hae no documents to show that there was" any lease

 agreement between his father and the father of

the third respondent. He is not even able to

4;’1′:’.n.e as a tenant was :5. not

.4.

show us that prior to 1974, the nanie, of his
father was found in any of the._”:Vreur§ords as

Cultivator in occupation of the

As a matter of fact, .:a*t-.parf’a

averments he says that resp_on.t”.1entV’i_i:”iniiiictefi’ J

him as a tenant respect. _o.Ef lands-tin
question and the R1’C_:___:Ve2;t1*a_vots.’wouldvvfisubstantiate

his contention 1971 onwards, tiii

_ …. -_4; in the ahsenee of the said land being a
1-2-1963 as it vested with

the”v-Government; question of any one indueting

‘ -Under the circumstances, the tribunal and

‘VtheA’.v–Vf}iearned single Judge were justified in

refusing to grant occupancy rights in favour of

” the appellant.

/

-5-

6. Having regard the above discuhsion and

the opinion expressed by u, it _.AJe_§:VV”i4i*.é.to’1.ovant

whether steps were taken R3-.3 ,” t ut_1_f1a

matter stood d.1.sm1ssedv.-Vas-.agé§.:l.:}o’t”V:v’R-4V3-tffoij not

taking steps! .

7. Accordingly, appéénl tiav-jdigigmissed.

Tuéqe
sai-