1 W.P.2282iffl2
{N THE HIGH coum" or-" KARNATAKA, BANGALORE
axrm mus THE 207" my 09' OCTOBER 2009 . j
BEFORE '
THE HONBLE mmusrace H.N.NAGA§»soH:A§: rigs; " » 'k
aewwaaw: '
Smt.THlF'PAKKA
SINCE DEAD BY HER LRS:
my A,;--;.MuN:RAMA:AH..
Sfo.LATE O.HAN§J3.%;£§$_iTHfi;PPA(.V -
92) LAKSMAFPA %
S!:>.§..ATE:0.%e£ANU¥s:?Am*HA9?A,_\ &
93) cHALAPA'AmY';:~«1 % M
s:o.LA'rE O.H:~%2§iUMAN_TFEAPF?5x,
cm _ HANlf£?§§A§£$jTHAPF5A"DEf_&_Q *3? H38 LRs:
<2? saesswfisa
_ " _ S!aa,:HA£%:UPAANTHAPPA.
(b) ' .1_§<R:s§-it~3";i;ga.1{Jr~=2'{H~:
:3:e.:+:Az~:uMA:qTHAPPA'
" " ' L n :5; V. , %sAR;{swATHs
* V E}§e.HANUMANTHAPPA.
5 ARE Rza AVAM VILLAG£ & P9,,
T A .usumAsAL TALUK, KOLAR mzsmzcr.
.. . PETFYIGNERS
:(§Y SIEKRAGHAVENDFEA RAG, Adv.)
g\\/ \E'"
V K $\{AN¥ Hosu, MULBAGAL TALUK.
2 W.?.22821;'{32 ._
3:-
2
5?
STATE OF KARNATAKA
z." I
REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
M.S.BUlLDlNG, EANGALORE '
2. TAHSILDAR, MULBAGAL TALUK,
MULBAGAL.
3. 'JENKATARAMAPPA, Mme%Rf«
319 LATE MUNIYAPPA '
4. LAKSHMAPPA,MA.iC}R_ L _ %
sxozme MuN:vAPr?A
5. GOWRAMMA,€.!§fiAL;jf3.5R;;. " 4 K %
wzo LATE..&3.EET§e{AF€A§dA¥?{?A.___ ~ "
5, SEETHAZMAMA,'$Aif$i€.'E'~-¥Z§EAE)v§S'---HER ms
3) SANJv5E\.¥A??'A;"
$10 more sag1*HAmA,
_ _:AcsE AT K}C)LAR-..!.N
M.A.m.33;1995 Am ALLOW THIs"*miR:T PETITKBN VJETH
cosrs.
ms wan" PETIT!ON c~wnNs:--
The subject §:%at§éTV;*9f tiias agriculturai iands
situated as Chg$iag:§£§£e5.i.f§II;;§}a2,: Avwnabzs, Mulabagai Taiuk. The
demfis of Sy.No. ,'r3ature, véfid-..§s.séssrr:ent of iand are given as
under
" $sy.Edo;._--, Nautre of' """ Extent Amount
A __'W . "Land
m'*;m;;;__;EV)§',t ' 4.28 8.09
-5-550 Xftiei' 0.18 2.23
'T ':48 Wet 0.10 1.50
-.56 . Wei: 0.22 3.50
65 Wet (M2 135
?3' , * Wet 0.353 12$
4 " :35 Wet 8.38 5.53
Dry 3.36 6.06 T
TOTAL 11.14 29.375
W
4 W.?.22821.ff32
2. Admittedly, the lands in question are imam iapds
attached to the office of Thoti. After Village Office Abolition
into foroe, the petitioner and respondent N033 to 6 have .
approached the 2″” respondent Tahsiidar for re–grant-ofrtii’oso”iVa:nc!§. ii
After severai rounds of litigation, the 2″”[ro$;;oréAdoiit»
remand passed an order on 28.03.1935 as«’por’r~Anne:<o–ro. 1D
granting 'A share in the iands in queoéioriiri favoiir*.of'i%ie ootitionor
and the remaining Vi share. En'~~..f_avc:§i;irm§g~o.:fo3i§onoent to E3.
Aggrieveci by this order of Tahsiiioaodziiioo the petitioner
herein filediairéiiépg-o;1l_ béfgie Ttho.:"Eistriot"J£rdge in M.A.No,33!199'5.
so also the :1'i22$;5orxd<::riii§io:;«!'3 appeai in M.A.i\io,1 911996.
The District Jucifgo.Viby aVVoon5mfiori…'iiLidgment dated 05.04.2002 as per
VV..fi.o_nexuVro5'«:- ;E__?€iisi_reisé.o'di both me appeais and confirmed the order of
VTaAh~;~:iViVcia£,V Horace' ._\_zvr?£ petition,
ii Tiioiioa3:;£'ned singio Judge of this Com xricie order éated
.2o'?.Q;6,2003'~r§V¥'smissed the writ petition. Further the Division Bench of
"o§u'rt«_.:n w.A.No.5s4?;2oo3 wide order dated 13.93.2095 oot
A' ___aoi'dei:he order of the teamed singio Judge and remanded the matter
. V _ fo.tioosingio Judge for rooonsidoratiorz. This is how the present writ
petition is before me.
ox”
5 W.P.2282I!G2
4. Heard arguments on both the side and perused tii’e–_
entire writ papers.
5′ lt is net in dispute that the lands in question » ere :lfiem- _ ii
iands attached to the Village Qfiice of Thoti. On e.ne heed; lp.eiil:ieher_’_: A ;_e .’
ceniends that she is the legal heir ef origirflai viilege ‘effice heldef, she’; .
is in pesseseien ef entire extent ef land efid:she_ was’diseiel?gilig the
duties atiached te the village offieeé_ we is erititled fer
re-grant of entire lands. On the N053 to 6
contend that ere.5’ele;flege:l;’relereeeeieiives of original village
office fielder, are entire lands and they were
discharging Aihve viilaiyel difiee and as such entitled for re-
gi°ei’it. pf e?j£i’l*e;»_l-endvsAf Ae”aga’iiist this rival claim of petitioners and
reepei1cierii’ii*~io£’i..§_3′ seen frem the record that petitioner filed
17*d,__epplicafiee”en and again on 2436,1968 as found at
i°».$i4.l\¥e.52, 8: 57 in the iriclex of reeerds. in lileee two
.1 ._§:p%;§iieefieee…A{iled by the petitieriers, side has given the cletaiis of
of lands and extent of lands in her possessien and
V’ ‘ V . . _ _ else E’le’aseessment as under:
gym»
is
5 w,p.22.?=f>,__1:a2
Name of Syfio. Nature Area Assessment –
vifiage of .V__;’-«.PaI8_” ‘
Land 7 ” ‘
Véfiage,
Avani
How,
Muibagafu
Taiuk
48 Dry 0-10, 1-59.’ ”
58 Dry 0-22 _ ‘,3-as ‘#9
55 D;3i~._ 0:32 * 1-455 ”
73 nry4.__;_Wg}o;.* V 356 _
85 Dry ; ‘:3-359 . s.3.~,;s:.:. ”
97 V Wat,.__ 3–:.se_ . ‘*?–5ei_~–” *’
374 R 3 S In’ 1.”
6. ___}§TV¢ém:b’ai;§::g9n_ fcté$:§VH;exitent of lands as per the
RTC extraizjts _art£i {i*;+:”=e§€t3ht-._§f-«–Eands ciaimed by the petitioner
manifestiy méxeé it (flea? ‘tfia: on¥y daiming ‘)5 share in the
Eands in gquegtiont V-»The’1Taf§s¥¥<§ar and the warned Qistrict Judge
1-'igaitici;-;g'%-z;?§e E:1é:§x*te?1t.;fciaEVtVf’:”‘i91!AIaée by the petitioner righfiy conciuded
tf{ia:_. e:1t:¥i:ied for ‘A1 share in the lands in question.
— V’vTherefb»rg:%, th9.’:p;é;tif§oner cannot have any grievance abeut the
«irfipugned ¢$d{“é’f$t What is prayed by the petitfioner is grarzteti to her
.A;;r§éi’e:V2fi锑§mpugneci orders. On ibis gmurzd, the writ petition is iiabie
A’ ‘ , .___t%>’.’§aeV’::e}ec€ed.
‘2’. Under bath the impugned orders, it is stated {hat from
° the spot inspection, report of the Revenue mspectar and the
cmiagmte 40 Dr? 948 24?._ 1′ ég;:32_._
7 W.P.22821i02
mahazar, it was found that petitioner was in possession of % shéfié’ jj–~:
the lands in question and respendent N933 to Biygre in = _
and enioyment of the remaining ta share of tiée iaizf-zdésgiviriii
Agaia, this materia! on record supparis-.___the ¥ea’§oningV»”i§€VA ii
Tahsildar and the District Judge in the im;$iJgriied_Vord?érs.’«_V”¥
iustifiabie ground to interfere with
For the reascns stated abqyé; hereby
rejected.
