BEFGRE
THE HON'BLE MRJUSTICEfi.'V.G.I{;é.§}I:E_SHj'; k%
WRI"_F__;?'E'1'IT'ION Ntj;-49a3%A 0F%2:iO8(%L1ag'e,-* V
At11ib5sie"I~IQb'§.i, Air§.»:kai'-- Talulg ' --- . V
Bang.a1or;=:.D'ist1iic1;, . '
Pin-562107.' .V "
(BysriM.%:3.Varadarq;an;%Adv_)
%%%%%
1 V ;Asfii':starit"C(f)mmissioner &
. "'~Authc?ri--sédVOfficer under
Se§_.:i:ion..777A of the
Karnataka Land Reforms Act,
.. An-'skal,
fiangaiore Sub-Division,
V' ' ' "Bangalore District,
Pin-562107.
2. Venugopalaswamy Deity Inam,
Mayasandra Viiiage,
Athibglts; Hghlig
2??'
Anekal Taluk,
Bangalore district,
Represented by Tahsildttr,
Anekal Taluk,
I-'in~562iG7.
3. Krishnappa,
Sic G-evindar:-pa,
Aged about 70 years, '.V "
Residing at Mayasandra Village, "
Athibele Hob-li, Aneka! ' '
Bungalow District. it _' E
Pin-562107. - '4S':' f;i;nspoN1mNTs
(By Sri.Nadiga shimaamnmp)
This 'i\Iri?._..I;"'.etitiOn is under Articles 226 of the
Censt*it'at1£a§n«:joif?_Indie._jfi's3'i_fi§--'w'gqiiash the impugned order
dt-31,..~1i--.07_ ..by_th_e l<Zamateka Appellate Tribunal in
A9139!!! N041' G61/03 vide"~Anx.fi_; and restore the order dt.24.5.03
by R1 in 4;age*No;LRté."A 1" "-' '0°='-)9.
ll I15-INN II-I
" This Visit' Petition coming on for pre!in=.-inary hearing
" _ day, the C0tlfi"iii&de the following:
Q__R.I)ER
.. "Petitiioner has sought for to quash the order passed by the
.14. ........a.
. .11: mm
.. ......... 4!...
"J lV3IUfU IIIU
2. The petitioner claiming to be the tenant in respect of
me properties in SyNo.1l4 .r.nea..1
cairn o n w
l in
Sy.No.'29 measuring 3 acres 6 guntas of »
Athibele Tel-uk which are said to eaatmetnam 2*'
respondentflfenugopalaswamy e .
befar” the Lfiid Tribttnel for of eeett*,:.at1e3.”-:t.,ltts te the
half extent in both sesumey simiiariy, the rival
i claimant 3″ respondentghad for grant of
occ-,p_-ly survey number to the
full its ‘rder dated 36.12.91
while in favour of the petitioner to
half l 1as– claim of the 3″ respondent. The
sea; eeuer -;-Jase e..al.enged ‘W he 3″ espnndent
» –Co’er_t __P.’No.466’78/’03 and this Court by order dated
” the said petition. The petitioner on the
~ – 1…… ,.
_ 5l.’i.l’V 1umuu1’a’I’. in
ground that he is in possession and cultivation of the said
A ‘ In.
I’53’LI.Dll afiu Sifififi I13 Wan .Iuu.u.Iuu.u an
I… 4:.
J. “”””‘t’
did not know the exact measurement he claimed only half’
extent, he filed an application in Form No.7A before the 1”
Any
respondent/Authorised Officer for grant of remaining half
extent of land. The application was allowed by_4~»:latcr_l
“4.5.”3. The same was challenged by the 3″‘
the Kamataka Appellate Tribunal.,by._filing
by the impugned order appeal was 2
nrnnf rnnrln 1: Ian Inf nu-an 2 Qunnr :11. iit\IIl3.l\’F’- ai’i\uh1-annsaé
alillli Jllllhlé II’ III? I I-|’III\-IIIIWWIJ ’35-Jul:-Iy$U’¥I III 4-? I ‘ll tall”
was set aside. Hence,-‘fills petitiongljp ”
3. Hearcijglbe flue petitioner and the
I………..t rL.-……- n1′;–_u”;a .; V :
1 1 u \.mvI:I;_m_uuIu l”.I_ uuér. ~
It is the of the petitioner’s Counsel that the
3″‘ locus to tile an appeal the
. : ‘Appellate Tribunal has entertained the same.
V III III’! Wu” W-‘Y Is! ‘I III 355 I
.. per the legal position, when once Form No.7 was
“V II’ .
\-JIIYI II€I.\J’I\I I. Hull IIUUIIZI 3.3? \’«II V I
enquiry he had been granted with occupancy rights to the half’
extent in the above survey numbers, petitioner cannot avail to
Al”
introduced by way of an amendment only to ‘_ i
of the tenants those who have not”‘avaiiefi.ithe:i j
Section 48A by filing Form
petitioner had been considered
occupancy rights to yfurtheificlioim made by
the petitioner by the competent
Tribunaliiieeieigiiifly of the petitioner and the
sme does not .oa1I ‘for ‘interfcreaice.
i” ~ y Government Pleader is directed to file his memo
H ” appear’ iiwithin four weeks from today.
CD
1::
I