{"id":210914,"date":"2009-03-18T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-03-17T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-by-secy-vs-the-chairman-land-tribunal-on-18-march-2009"},"modified":"2018-06-18T07:50:18","modified_gmt":"2018-06-18T02:20:18","slug":"state-of-karnataka-by-secy-vs-the-chairman-land-tribunal-on-18-march-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-by-secy-vs-the-chairman-land-tribunal-on-18-march-2009","title":{"rendered":"State Of Karnataka By Secy vs The Chairman Land Tribunal … on 18 March, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
State Of Karnataka By Secy vs The Chairman Land Tribunal … on 18 March, 2009<\/div>\n
Author: Huluvadi G.Ramesh<\/div>\n
!'~.)\n\nThis Writ Peiiiion having been rasewed for Orders on \n2969, the Ceurt made the faliow\ufb01ng;  4' ,  L-  V \"\n\n(SEWER\n\nPetition is by the State challengingiz\ufb01he {>r{i e:*  \n\ndated 25.9.1932 in LRY 226 7445 an :he4'a_e\u00a71a:a1ion.vii1\u00a2;1':b\u00a7,v :t\u00a7; ;2\"'* \n\nrctspondent holding that 2\" responderz\u00a7\"\"i\u00a7r,.V:.t.Vio!d;ing i\u00e9I;d  \u00e9iicegg of 119.95\n\nacres 01' land.\n\n2\"' respondent,fi1cd  '\u00a331'-'n_1'  1{.i\u00e9;:iariz1g his holding<\/pre>\n
of agiculnlrai      is 1420 acres 99
\ncents. Accozjaatgggii.a\u00a7%:j:%\ufb01\u00a7'”‘pe:\u00a7ii}}\u00a7:c;{,f:he: ggid’ Form 11 \ufb01led by the 2″‘
\nf\ufb01Sp0nd\u00a3\u00a7%1\u00a5%l#\u20aci  27 cents of land which was
\nin pos3es;iiog% 19$  _:’ifY:s’:””tenants. The Land Tribunal without<\/p>\n
ilol\u00e9ing inqu\u00a7:’3} ‘1;;t1\u00a7iei* iii\u00bb:  Land Reforms Act passed an order an<\/p>\n
 V.  _,25.9;..\u00a7’93E”inciu\u00a73ing tlg\u00e9\ufb01aid’ Varaa of $6.27 acxes of Land which according<\/p>\n
  \ufb02\u00e9\u00e9rxz. s\u00a7ias i1:4f3.<*g\u00a7s\u00a2$sien of the tenants and 716 asres. 7?' cents which is<\/p>\n
aiiega to _be' ?aV_ pimmtion area and fnrtimr held thai 2*' respondent is<\/p>\n
 .__ent'itled~t\u00a7\ufb01' E016 29 units of D (31383 iand. The toial of ail these {ands is<\/p>\n
A \u00bb T:  ages 4 :2-exits whiah is exciudad from the hoiding vi' 2"' respcmxient.<\/p>\n
Further, it is submitted when me: atppiicatien \ufb02ied by the aileged<\/p>\n
tenant at the reievant pain: 9:" time was aim perzding cunai\u00e9eration, Farm
\n\/<\/p>\n
1; is \ufb01led by the 2"' respcndeni before the Land Tribunal. T155:<\/p>\n
Tribunal ought to have clubbed both Form 7 filed by the so C\ufb01j\ufb01\ufb01edv   A "<\/p>\n
zmci also the Form. I} filed by the 2"'! respondentiand\u00e9gugiitfiiliil\u00e9h\u00e9iic\u00e9  <\/p>\n
a cammon order while disposing of the matter.\n<\/p>\n
According to the petitioner, the -a_l1ege<i'Wtv;ri\u00a5a:1cy :i.s"'}.i'VVAa::c;liusi_i;–'e Vi<\/p>\n
tenancy and the said claim is only to get    {if the
\n2"" respondent. It is their CaS$V$i3'.i'tiITi.Tf1\u20ac  of llil\u00e9iixcres 77
\ncents is not a plantation grea.  may on the
\nbasis (if survey  2:  ibieen given in the
\nholding Cif the   a spot inspection, The
\nTribmal ha\u00a7=;l'<i::ii1i1e'  .\u00a7ci:c}u\u00a7i6\ufb01' tliat the applicant is hokiing
\nexcess aggriciiltufal lami  acres 95 cents. It is also stated<\/p>\n
that \u00a3116 allegediiia'-:$i11;;a;i\u00e9y__  by the tenants is a collusive<\/p>\n
"\u20aci*.;1a1:c\u00a7.{;'  Ti is \ufb01i\u00e9d\u00abin___\u00a3;c+i1usion with the 2" respondent" which is<\/p>\n
iipgoi\ufb01iiiicd  iitzf Kamataka Land Reforms Act. The claim of tenancy<\/p>\n
is  g7e"ti?e'1;.%a1\u00a2:i".:.ii \ufb01om the total holding of the 2*" respondent.<\/p>\n
"V:l1c.';ii\u00e9tiii0ner State has scmght for a mi: of certiorzaii to<\/p>\n
M ii   :33 orii\u00e9r dated 25.9.1982 passed by the respondent Land Tribunal<\/p>\n
 .'_a1\u00abt__ ai\ufb01uui\u00e9iiiif\u00e9 A.\n<\/p>\n
”  _  Heard \ufb02ue counsel regresaniing the garties.\n<\/p>\n
:_:f’\u00e9\u00a7pe:>nden\u00a7_j sgwic tbs;  the Land Reforms Act<\/p>\n
 vi’ii*)fIiiin3’EA6″‘{}\u20ac1a\u00a7f 0f years in \ufb01iing this Writ petition and the State<\/p>\n
”  Vvegyj weiivz\ufb01are of the proceedings and erder passed by the Land
\n .3’$j’A.’i\u00a3 is a party to the proceedings and the order passed by the<\/p>\n
h 1  has bwen acmepted by {he gavemment amt: if has taken aver
\n A\u00bb;7,;\u00a7\u00a31{?;2;erssi0n ef the suzpius $396.. The surveys? has visited the spot an\u00e9<\/p>\n
 V mnducted the survey which d\ufb01sclases {hat $76 acres and 2′? acres has been<\/p>\n
it is the suhrnission of the Gsvemmeni Pleads: that .
\ninspecting the smt, the Tribunai has simpiy accepted the contenti\ufb01\u00e9in    is
\nrespondent deciaring {hat 716 acres 7′? cents as plaziiation  .:\u00a711;%$Vi’i:s’_’_
\nis oniy 119 acres 95 cents and even the report 7 A
\nInspector has been blindiy accepted statigi;-;5-;, tia3;\u00a7 ii pL*vs$e9:b:\u00a7!i\u00a7iri’:A._:o’\u00a7’–V.ihe-‘*3
\ntenants and tenancy has been creatfzd to   420
\n{“312 the report submitted by thev    of ian\u00e9 is
\nplantatinn area, is with a13._ulteriqr.Vz::<;.\u00a7t_ijze .i ;:tVr_i;'r;:'i;i.\u00abiiv;;%'::;\u00e9$;i5ndents, it is
\naccordingly subrnitt\u00a7:i3._.:v   to have been
\nconducted by axe    \ufb01uge extent of land as
\nplantation  of S104 of the Lani}
\nReforms Aat  it is "\u00a311: impugned order is passed<\/p>\n
igmring {ha fact \ufb02;\u00a7f'i31_ianc\u00a7.'–is \u00e9iv.ciii"li;sive tenancy at \ufb01le imtanc\ufb01 of the<\/p>\n
 :9'-:*:1_ c\u00e9:':1\u00a7fa.5 for the respnndent submitted that there is<\/p>\n
M<\/p>\n
granted in favour of the tenants and an extent of 716 acres and 1?'?    5   <\/p>\n
3 plantatinn area as such, as, per S104 cf the Land Ref-arms Act,  L' " <\/p>\n
area does not come within that ceiling Limit.\n<\/p>\n
In the Light of the arguments adva\ufb01cc\ufb01, tIr1e   <\/p>\n
censideraiion is — wiwther the impugned  gassed’
\nTribunal halding that there is exc\u00e9;Aa\u00a7 ‘\u00a7;1nd.’_fo  119 acres 95<\/p>\n
cents is justified and, whether the impugi3.\u00a2d   jin’iL61’f6I’6\ufb02G6.<\/p>\n
Of course there  deigjgf in pirsfex\ufb01tig th\u00a2A\u00a7vi”ij\u00a7  It is noticed,
\non behalf of the  a af\ufb01gmatiim letter
\ntn the e\ufb02\u00b0<:ct ihai'   'amasv 99 cents and also
\nhaving noticed t\u00a7_1at  and also Form 3' is \ufb01led
\nsacking for deciar\u00e9\ufb01arf\u00e9\u00e9and;  abeut 476 acm 27 aeres has
\n '\ufb01at:   Remaining 'E16 acms 77 cents is in<\/p>\n
p\u00e9ss\u00a7s\u00a7\u00a3o3n.. 91%  as per the report of the Surveyor and also<\/p>\n
 expr&\u00a7sit:g'T.–.t\u00a7;aiV" area cmlid have been exempied from the<\/p>\n
 '.VVa';5p1ica\u00a3ie1\u00a3'.i2f  Refmms ska! as per S.}.Ci4i, the Land Tribxznai has<\/p>\n
' A.e::\u00a7znp\u00a5\u00a30f.a to ihe extent of '.116 acres and "I7 cents and {mi}?<\/p>\n
 133:3 over the iand to the extent of 319 acres 95 cents stating<\/p>\n
 "it.iS72\u20ac3.'\u00a7i}\u20ac5s land as per 867(1) am} {2} of the Land Reforms 53:3": after<\/p>\n
 '*\u00ab  Agvi\ufb01g su\ufb01icieni opportunity \ufb01tmugh the Tahsiidar.<\/p>\n
Of marge % contendad by the Gevemment Pleadsm.' "\n<\/p>\n
Tribunal, having regard to the nature 9f the extent 9f the 1:\u00a7Vn_d”‘a::\u00a7 he}_d\u00bb.5y<\/p>\n
the respendent company ought to have made a  iitsp\u00a7ction.;te. T;\u00a7SL~e;tair1VV\u00ab’ <\/p>\n
the basis of the report published as to what \u00a39. t21c’:u m__;t\u20ac::’1*V\u00a3_A.{):f” lafitj\ufb01gztualiy  A ‘ –~ ‘<\/p>\n
possession 0f the mmpany as plantatiofi grid  to
\nwhether xealiy there were tenants :’if\u00a7..VOCCu133iib%\u00e9%i_:t9’\ufb011’3_ .exi\u00a71%f ‘of-*1?ib’\u00a7 acres
\n27 cents and 3339 eught to have has been
\ndrawn properly in fhisvragard’. 5  Tfibunai decided
\nthe matter forfeiti1}s_;*’3\u00a7’i’3_  95   Vito the govemxnant
\nwithout ascerft2_:i;3\u00a7;:1_g<\u00a7_x:'::ii inspection whether
\nthere is planig\ufb01on -s;1:;h:pex'Inissi{)n was aecerded for
\nraiaing p1antati\u00a7$n.\u00a7f\u00a3:p,  recimsideration at the: hands<\/p>\n
af the  Tdbun\u00e9i fe:V_VbVeiter '\u00e9ppreciat\u00e9on and disposal of the case in<\/p>\n
 'as\u00e9 ordar{\u00e9'e  }a\u00a7i.g__ta mnsider whether aciually them are tenants to the<\/p>\n
extnez'-2tVV\u00a33f  :i2 .cent3 and whether actuaiiy the csmpany was<\/p>\n
  *1~:e}dingA ggkntafiun  to the extent of 76? acres 7? cents and whether any<\/p>\n
_. 1,e:u__i;i';. pennis\u00e9igzjtwas obtained 9:' was require\u00e9 to raise the platntatian cmp<\/p>\n
 'an\ufb01 such area as piantatien area for axemptitm under 3.104 of<\/p>\n
K  Lafzd Refmms Act.\n<\/p>\n
Further, the order forfeiting 1}? acres 95 cents E airea\u00e9y effected,<\/p>\n
shaii nest be dismrbed’ Thnugh there: is delay, having regard to the huge<\/p>\n
JP<\/p>\n
extent of land and me iilegaiify alieg\ufb01d, fer \ufb01ne mason that \ufb01lis  ‘2 V
\nnot perpetuate the illegality, p\u00e9tition is ailowad. Matter is   M
\nto the Tribunal for disp<}sa1 in aceardance: wi\u00a7h"'I'aw. kee5;;1ng. <';, , \u00a7j\u00a2\u20ac\u00a7? ihba <\/p>\n
observatians ma\ufb01a above.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court State Of Karnataka By Secy vs The Chairman Land Tribunal … on 18 March, 2009 Author: Huluvadi G.Ramesh !’~.) This Writ Peiiiion having been rasewed for Orders on 2969, the Ceurt made the faliow\ufb01ng; 4′ , L- V ” (SEWER Petition is by the State challengingiz\ufb01he {>r{i e:* dated 25.9.1932 in LRY […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-210914","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nState Of Karnataka By Secy vs The Chairman Land Tribunal ... on 18 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-by-secy-vs-the-chairman-land-tribunal-on-18-march-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"State Of Karnataka By Secy vs The Chairman Land Tribunal ... on 18 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-by-secy-vs-the-chairman-land-tribunal-on-18-march-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-03-17T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-06-18T02:20:18+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-karnataka-by-secy-vs-the-chairman-land-tribunal-on-18-march-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-karnataka-by-secy-vs-the-chairman-land-tribunal-on-18-march-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"State Of Karnataka By Secy vs The Chairman Land Tribunal … on 18 March, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-03-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-18T02:20:18+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-karnataka-by-secy-vs-the-chairman-land-tribunal-on-18-march-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1190,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-karnataka-by-secy-vs-the-chairman-land-tribunal-on-18-march-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-karnataka-by-secy-vs-the-chairman-land-tribunal-on-18-march-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-karnataka-by-secy-vs-the-chairman-land-tribunal-on-18-march-2009\",\"name\":\"State Of Karnataka By Secy vs The Chairman Land Tribunal ... on 18 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-03-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-18T02:20:18+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-karnataka-by-secy-vs-the-chairman-land-tribunal-on-18-march-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-karnataka-by-secy-vs-the-chairman-land-tribunal-on-18-march-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-karnataka-by-secy-vs-the-chairman-land-tribunal-on-18-march-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"State Of Karnataka By Secy vs The Chairman Land Tribunal … on 18 March, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"State Of Karnataka By Secy vs The Chairman Land Tribunal ... on 18 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-by-secy-vs-the-chairman-land-tribunal-on-18-march-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"State Of Karnataka By Secy vs The Chairman Land Tribunal ... on 18 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-by-secy-vs-the-chairman-land-tribunal-on-18-march-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-03-17T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-06-18T02:20:18+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-by-secy-vs-the-chairman-land-tribunal-on-18-march-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-by-secy-vs-the-chairman-land-tribunal-on-18-march-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"State Of Karnataka By Secy vs The Chairman Land Tribunal … on 18 March, 2009","datePublished":"2009-03-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-18T02:20:18+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-by-secy-vs-the-chairman-land-tribunal-on-18-march-2009"},"wordCount":1190,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-by-secy-vs-the-chairman-land-tribunal-on-18-march-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-by-secy-vs-the-chairman-land-tribunal-on-18-march-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-by-secy-vs-the-chairman-land-tribunal-on-18-march-2009","name":"State Of Karnataka By Secy vs The Chairman Land Tribunal ... on 18 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-03-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-18T02:20:18+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-by-secy-vs-the-chairman-land-tribunal-on-18-march-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-by-secy-vs-the-chairman-land-tribunal-on-18-march-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-by-secy-vs-the-chairman-land-tribunal-on-18-march-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"State Of Karnataka By Secy vs The Chairman Land Tribunal … on 18 March, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/210914","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=210914"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/210914\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=210914"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=210914"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=210914"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}