{"id":5374,"date":"2010-01-06T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-01-05T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sunitha-a-shetty-vs-thimmappa-rai-on-6-january-2010"},"modified":"2017-05-11T01:18:10","modified_gmt":"2017-05-10T19:48:10","slug":"sunitha-a-shetty-vs-thimmappa-rai-on-6-january-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sunitha-a-shetty-vs-thimmappa-rai-on-6-january-2010","title":{"rendered":"Sunitha A Shetty vs Thimmappa Rai on 6 January, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Sunitha A Shetty vs Thimmappa Rai on 6 January, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: Manjula Chellur Gowda<\/div>\n
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE\nDATED THIS THE 6\" DAY OF JANUARY, \nPRESENT _ 3 V\nTHE HON'BLE MRSJUSTICE MANJuLA..C',\u00a3_i~E.LELj:RF.._ % T, L\n, THE MON'BLE MR. JUSTICE&A.NMEALLJAG\ufb013'PAL'A':.L3Q\\,A@A>1Vt'\nVVRFFAPPEALhg;\u00a765\/2@O9(LR\u00a73l,!. : 'L\nBETWEEN: 1'  V V V. 'L \nSunitha A Shetty @ L<;\u00e9 r$r:ara,'L' \ufb02 _ \u00bb\nW\/0. Late Anantharam S'h.,e"cty,__':'\u00bb \nAged about 65 years, ' V\n\nR\/a Alandkar Gzgdde,  \u00e9   ,\nNear Devasth_'an\u00e9j,;\u00bbT' , ,      \n\nTalapadi \\Ji'iiaqe',77-\u00bb., 'L   '--\n\nMangaiote'Ta|uk_."   \n " _ ' .  A' .   APPELLANT\n\n(By Sn. K.P'ra.sad.Heg'de," Adv.)\n\n   Ti'. \n\n'-.A'ge':'M"ajoAi:=,'S\/0. Late Seetharam Rai.\n\n2. .\u00b0sarst2h a'."jV.Shetty,\n\n A Agje,_:Major, D\/0. Late Seetharam Rai.\n\n \ufb01hankar Rai, Age: Major,\nS\/o. Late Seetharam Rai,\n\n" .L:.'i\n\nR1 to R3 are ali R\/a Yer\u00e9maru\nBantwaia Mooda Viilage,\nPost Eodumarga,\n\nBantwala Taiuk, Mangalore.\n\n\n\n4. Additional Land Tribunal,\nBantwala, Rep by its Secretary,\nTaluk Office, Bantwala.\n\n5. State of Karnataka,\nRevenue Department\nRep by its Secretary,\nM.S.Building,\nBangalore.\n\n(By Sri. K.Shashi Kiran Shetty,'Vi'i'i'=\u00bb."\/ps. sshett-y.r&'Heg'de\nAssociates for C\/R1--R3.~;_.  =    \nSri. T.i3.Srinivas, AGA .f_oi*-- R4-_ an-dVF'<'Ei__), \n\nThis Writ VAppeai....iS_'--.fil'e.d ..yur'rdei'~~i.'set:tion 4 of the\nKarnataka i-EighfQCo_urt;_'Act 'p:ra.yi'nfq--.._to' set aside the order\npassed in i_the}1~' V'-Jyrit 3_P'etition l\\lG'.'4242\/2008 dated\n03\/12\/2003;'      '\n\niihis  'for preliminary hearing this\nday, A.N\u00a7\/ENUG.Q'F'ALA"GQWDA, J, delivered the following:\n\n. JUDGMENT\n\n Sivnwtvilfdagamma was the yajamanthi of a certain\n\nPai\u00bb!.ama}~aliJi'..~Family, governed by Aliya Santhana law of\n\nV'-\u00bb.inheritance. Said Nagamma had two children vi2:.,\n\n,,,.4'_,fFhya".s'npanna Rai and Bhavani. Appellant is the daughter\n\n said Smt.Bhavani. The property held by Pallamajalu\n\nFamily was partitioned on 9.1.1968. According to\n\nI\n\nappellant, 'A schedule property was allotted in favour of\n\n  \n\n\n\nSri Thyampanna Rai and herself. Appellant \n\nThyampanna Rai is having only life interest.Vi_n':t=-he':;j:ro0.pert'y_\n\nas per Aliya Santhana iaw of inhferltaince "a__nd \n\nthe partition, she and her children iwge'r*e in po-"sse:ss'ionf a'nd"g\n\nenjoyment of the lands in que'stio"n.\n\n2. One SeethararnA'Rai"}.t_f\u00e9i~th.er"Vo'f:r:e'sbondents 1 to 3\nfiled Form E\\lo.?A.,;l.._"  fi_and Tribunal.\nUpon enqu:i_r--y;:v  occupancy rights\nin favovgu_F...Ovf""t.h;eVfwsaidl   Subsequently,\noccuD&iV1FlCv--  to Seetharama Raa' on\n\n27.4.1981";1._ApVpella'n't'._f'ilegd' writ petition to quash the order\n\n dated0.4,197\u00a7"'pras__s_ed by the land tribunal Bantwal Taluk\n\n \u00bb(Ari.nex.ure:A:t*o__the writ petition), under which, the lands\n\n measuring 1.10 acres, Sy.l'\\1o.74\/6\n\n1 meaisugring 0:20 cares, Sy.l\\io.65\/15 measuring 006 cents,\n\nix""'V.:r\u00bb.SyiNo.6\u00a7\/3 measuring 0.33 acres and Sy.E\\1o.67\/3A\n\n rneasuring 0.44 acres situated at Bantwal Moodu grama,\n\nBantwal Tatuk, Mangatore District were registered in the\n\nname of Seetharama Rai, father of respondents 2 and 3.<\/pre>\n
.\/<\/p>\n
It was stated in the writ petition that, notice of tjh’e,.f’ci,a”‘\u00e9irn<\/p>\n
made in Form No.7 was not given to  V’<\/p>\n
tribunal and she had no l<nowEedge._of  V'<\/p>\n
which took place before the land;"it.riEj's'_jn'al  <\/p>\n
application filed by said Sefet_h"arama" Rai and"'s'he~'learnt"f<\/p>\n
about the order passed by th-e:"i'gancl~~.._tribunal-..o.n'iEy during
\nlast week of November',"2'f307  "there is no delay
\nin approaching\u00e9the Coiu"r't'V'f'oif  Acicording to her, the<\/p>\n
order passed"..by,..-t_bei.:_l–.a__nd_t-tibunai\u00bb is illegal being in<\/p>\n
violation  0??"{i_.atlJ'FalVV3UStlC\u20ac and Rule 17 of the
\nKarnataka Land ('Ruies' for short) and no<\/p>\n
occupancy  could have been granted in respect of the<\/p>\n
' -ilan''d–sV'inquesgtion. H iiiii H<\/p>\n
V".–..,'3x."'kikjesgpofyndents 2 and 3 flied statement of<\/p>\n
'V obje4ct\u00a7o"ns,"wherein it was stated that, the said lands have<\/p>\n
  possession and enjoyment of their father late<\/p>\n
—  Seetharama Ra”: since from 1959, he was the tenant of the<\/p>\n
“property for a long length of time, RTC records show the<\/p>\n
name of their father as the tenant from 196869 to 1980~<\/p>\n
81 and that the name of Thyampanna Rai is <\/p>\n
owner in the revenue records and that <\/p>\n
paying geni to said Thayamparina_yRai_,’ wh_o”oi’wner'”<\/p>\n
of the property in question and that appe-‘iia’ii.ti has riVo:V’irig”iit;<\/p>\n
title and interest over the”pi’o.perty’.i. if Th_ey.:V”‘h~ave.statedC<\/p>\n
that, their father fiied Form  which was
\nenquired into by the V’i”rii5ii_na_iy :.ac’c-ordyiance with iaw and
\nthereafter the order da.te’d\u00bb  w_as.A”t>’assed conferring<\/p>\n
occupancy .ri.g\u00a7hts\u00a7i’n_._i’a=vo\u00ab=iri-of  Form No.10 was<\/p>\n
 have stated that, even RTC
\nrecord show tine.’iii_anoe*~._\u00e9:\u00a7fi.their father from 1981-82 to<\/p>\n
1999y2000\ufb02uan_d that it-hevisaid Seetharama Rai expired on<\/p>\n
“and thherevafter the name of their mother<\/p>\n
  entered in the RTC records from 2000-\n<\/p>\n
01  2(_),{).<'4i:\u00a5:Li:SiV.and she expired on 3.5.2004 and thereafter<\/p>\n
 harnes have been entered in the RTC and other<\/p>\n
A   reiv,eri–'iie records. They have also referred to various other<\/p>\n
transactions. They contested the writ petition by raising<\/p>\n
 various objections inciuding the deiay and iaches.<\/p>\n
\\<\/p>\n
{v<\/p>\n
4. Learned Single Judge having heard <\/p>\n
and after examining the records, has noticed  <\/p>\n
revenue records were not chainge-d, p_,ursLlant_ Vtojkthe<\/p>\n
registered partition deed of<\/p>\n
Thyarnpanna Rai, who is  oth’er__ thiarrz t”h:e””so’n of”<\/p>\n
original owner Smt.l\\iva..g,arnm,a,— w’,i’.o’se,,..narrie”wasi found in
\nthe Record of Rights  respondent in
\nthe proceedings,Dbeforeilltlheiland’r~Vtifii..bVuV’na:.l’and he being the
\nelder  riotifiield of the proceedings
\nand  rules of natural justice
\nhave Learned Single Judge has also<\/p>\n
noticed from re’cords”‘that, respondents 1 to 3 and their<\/p>\n
“V”‘-i.,preid.ece’sso’irs havempaid taxes to the land in question and<\/p>\n
,.,_th_a.t”tih:e’i;<:Vr'ia~g<.e:'_jproduced the records and hence, he could<\/p>\n
notlfind..aln;,rferror with the order passed by the land<\/p>\n
V'-\u00bb.tribun'al.K Hence, has held that the writ petition is liable to<\/p>\n
 .,'b'e_,_di}smissed on merits apart from there being no reasons<\/p>\n
  __t_o condone the delay of 31 years in filing the writ petition.<\/p>\n
The writ petition was dismissed not only on the ground of<\/p>\n
delay and laches but also on merits. This appeal is<\/p>\n
\\e<\/p>\n
\/Z".\n<\/p>\n
directed against the said order with a prayer to s,er: ,iarsiae<\/p>\n
the order passed by the learned Single _<\/p>\n
the writ petition and to grant the reliefs  in .. <\/p>\n
writ petition.\n<\/p>\n
S. We have heard  .,ViA~wie_,g’g’r.\u00e9p”!””‘iearned”V<\/p>\n
counsel appearing for.\u00a7lDDel.ia*nt.iianld-\u00bb.,Sri tK.”-Sh.aEshi Kiran
\nShetty, learned   j.:a’p-peering for<\/p>\n
caveators\/resVp.ond.ent:;\u00a7  iieia\u00abr_ned1AuGA who appeared<\/p>\n
for resp.o.n_d’E~ntS;”:’1*?\u00a7_.aHd:  it ‘W.e….E:ilso perused writ appeal<\/p>\n
record. r ‘<\/p>\n
_ .6.  i<i.F'ras'adt"':Hegde contended that, appellant<\/p>\n
 and Che"r= ct'*ii..i,drent'w'ere not made a party before the land<\/p>\n
 proceedings initiated by father of<\/p>\n
res.pond-ants-AT1 to 3 i.e., Form No.7, in which, only<\/p>\n
Thyarripanna Rai, who had only limited right over the<\/p>\n
v.".,,prropt.erty was shown as respondent. Even said<\/p>\n
_'V_f_i\u00a7hyarnpanna Rai was not served with the notice and<\/p>\n
hence, has not contested the proceedings, As such, the<\/p>\n
order passed by the land tribunal, copy of which is at<\/p>\n
\\'.,\/,<\/p>\n
.a~<\/p>\n
Annexure–A, is in vioiation of Rule 17 of <\/p>\n
Land Reforms Rules and opposed to princi_plv_Aes_o:fl.:"natul'r'al!..,Vl*<\/p>\n
justice and even otherwise the said order  <\/p>\n
order. Learned counsel conVtendedi–h_at–,. the,V.!e.arne\u00abd Sin'gie"g<\/p>\n
Judge was not justified in dislrnissing  petition and
\nhence, interference is cailed  it by<\/p>\n
7. Sri icshasiiiw  counsel
\nappearing for’   other hand, by<\/p>\n
taking us  the ,st’1\u00a7;\u00e9:,rfieipi’~.\u00a7)f”objections filed to the<\/p>\n
writ pe..titio’n,.co’n’te_nd.e’d”–th’at, the writ petition which is filed
\nafter the”d_ei.-3y of  “years is hopeiessly barred by delay<\/p>\n
andi\u00e9iacihes. ‘Eve,n_____otheriiyise Thyampanna Rai, whoever<\/p>\n
i accord.,in’g, ‘t\u00aboV”th_e appeiiants a co–owner of the property was<\/p>\n
H in\ufb01’i3.ieaVded.”,:asphalt party respondent before the iand tribunal.<\/p>\n
Notice the proceedings was served on him. The claim<\/p>\n
  nra–d.e in Form No.7 by Seetharama Rai being weii founded<\/p>\n
anldlisubstantiated by the record, was not contested. Even<\/p>\n
uwotherwise, the Tribunal having held the enquiry into the<\/p>\n
matter in accordance with law and havinifound that, the<\/p>\n
\/f-\n<\/p>\n
properties in respect of which Form No.7 <\/p>\n
being tenanted properties and having vestedwiln .th.eV’i”\u00a7tat’e <\/p>\n
on 1.3.1974, the appointed day,””occLJpa.nCy’:Ar’l:g.E\u00a7ts”-wete<\/p>\n
granted in favour of the tenantA:’iS2eet_haran’f._a.A”Rai.it<\/p>\n
person having enjoyed the ‘p._ro”pertyV; ‘has.d’eai’tTwE’th the’<\/p>\n
same as an absolute owxner,w’iiii.c_h’ ‘is”r.g’vident”fro”n1 various
\nrecords produced along   of objections.\n<\/p>\n
Appellant was  for a long
\nlength of  and though has been
\nresiding 8 years, did not raise
\nany objerctiolns.:_.to:_jj\u00bbthe.:g:_:”no’i’ding and enjoyment of the<\/p>\n
property  respiohrnd\u00e9ntsdl to 3. It was pointed out that<\/p>\n
bl’\u00ab.,Th’\u00a7,-.a:mi9ani’ia Rail\ufb01as\u00e9vnot questioned the order passed by<\/p>\n
_thge’V’La_nd_!’Tribunal. Learned counsel referred to various<\/p>\n
docyumen.tsl’i’..–produced along with statement of objections<\/p>\n
 and con__t3ended that, the learned Singie Judge was justified<\/p>\n
“”V’.A’rn.,ciismissing the writ petition even on merits.<\/p>\n
ls,<\/p>\n
.-‘I<\/p>\n
10<\/span><\/p>\n
8. Sri T.P.Srinl\\\/as, learned AGA made sub’misg:s.i:o~ns<\/p>\n
in support of findings and conclusion of the   <\/p>\n
granting occupancy rights in favou<r"0f–Seetharaina  <\/p>\n
9. In View of the submi_ssion’s_vhmade <\/p>\n
counsel on both sides, the poi’nts_V”%f’orVconsideration. are:
\n(1) Whether  pi.etl’itii..o_n_i’isp_hit by delay and
\nlaches?    I
\n(2) Wvh4\u20ac:t’li.e’r learned: S4ln’g’l’_e_ Judge was justified in<\/p>\n
 thewrit_\u00ab~petitio:nmeven on merits?\n<\/p>\n
Re. F5o\u00e9’ntj_\\io.\n<\/p>\n
1’O.x The  in the writ petition, passed<\/p>\n
by 4?”. resp’on._de’n.t’-is’-dated 6.4.1977 (Anne><ure–A). The<\/p>\n
 v_writ..ije5t'itio'n._was iilediyin the year 2008 i.e., nearly after 31<\/p>\n
-yllegarscr  of the said order. Although no period of<\/p>\n
lim-it_at\u00e9ori~ prescribed for filing of a writ petition under<\/p>\n
l3″\u00bb-‘~___V’-\u00bb.Articles.V__A226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, any<\/p>\n
 aggrieved has to approach the writ Court for relief<\/p>\n
.v”‘”v..’._\\l_\\!%itl’1il1 a reasonable time. Whether relief should be<\/p>\n
granted to a petitioner under writ jurisdiction where the<\/p>\n
cause of action has arisen in the remote past is a matter of<\/p>\n
t<\/p>\n
12<\/span><\/p>\n
passed by the Land Tribunal for which copy applicatii-onwas<\/p>\n
filed, certified copy was obtained and the  ‘<\/p>\n
filed. The said averments are no;t\u00bb~\u00bbba_cked ‘any of it<\/p>\n
evidence and have merely rema’i’ned’_’_’a’s av~e_rinera_ts’\u00bb.l_lf\u00abWle.<\/p>\n
specifically asked Sri K.Pras_ad..V_ Hedde, Vi_ea~rne.d'””counsel”VV<\/p>\n
appearing for appeflant to plo.i.n:t”Lv-0utLA.an.y”materiial which
\nshows that the  the property
\ntill the date of 4f_ilin__Q ofthe’   from the date
\nof passing:__  by the Land<\/p>\n
‘ Tribunail.”VlvLea\u00bbrned.v::counjyseiv was tinabie to point out or show<\/p>\n
any materialy.  hand, respondents 1 to 3 have<\/p>\n
placed, reco’r’dS:Vtos.shoTw their possession and enjoyment of<\/p>\n
‘TV'”V.thel’i–pro\u00bb-perty, payrnenit of revenue etc., The entries in the<\/p>\n
\u00b0z_r’ei;oVrd produced by respondents, have got<\/p>\n
pres_iim_pt.ive’..–Avaiue iinder S.133 of the Karnataka Land<\/p>\n
3″-‘~.__”-\u00bb.Reven.’uet’Act. Appellant has not produced any evidence to<\/p>\n
V”‘V’.diis.pi:\u00e9;ce the presumption. The inordinate delay in<\/p>\n
__approaching the writ Court for reiief has not been<\/p>\n
 satisfactoriiy explained. Except making baid statement in<\/p>\n
the writ petition, noticed supra, appellant has not produced<\/p>\n
\\Q\/.\n<\/p>\n
13<\/span><\/p>\n
any materiai whatsoever to ignore the deiay of<\/p>\n
years in filing the writ petition. Delay aridflach,e:s:..’b’ein”gA<\/p>\n
relevant factors for exercise of writ .j.i;risdictvi’4o’n-Qappeiiant V<\/p>\n
has not made out any case to eiryerir\ufb02ise the tii.sycret!ion_a’r-y<\/p>\n
jurisdiction. The writ petitionf.i\u00a7vei.ng hit’ by ~d_eia.y~~la’jches,* V<\/p>\n
learned Singie Judge was justi.fi.e’d_ in.._hoidi”ng..,th,a’\u00a7t there is
\nno reason to ignore dellay  rm filing the writ
\npetition. We dohot firi’d”any; njhat:ergial’-onreczord, which has<\/p>\n
not been  b-,r;_t_he-i..iea’rriie’d Single Judge, to take a<\/p>\n
differeht vifewfivn the-‘in4a’tter. .\n<\/p>\n
Re.l3’o_4i rit  <\/p>\n
  The a~vevr_rnents made in the writ petition itself<\/p>\n
\u00bbsnows..vthat,:T’hyarnpanna Rai was issued with a notice of<\/p>\n
Rthe–glaVi’rri”.f’o._roteupancy rights, but he did not participate in<\/p>\n
.q the.4″pro’t:eed”iVngs. it has been specificaily stated in the writ<\/p>\n
V’ ”  peiri.t.ion”‘as foliows:\n<\/p>\n
  “Sri Thyarripanna Rai who has got very limited right
\nover the iands in dispute did not appear Land
\nTribunal nor contested the claim of the father of the<\/p>\n
respondent No.1 — 3.” E
\n\/.1<\/p>\n
14<\/span><\/p>\n
Appeiiant has conceded that, Thyampanna Rai <\/p>\n
over the property and has not contested <\/p>\n
It is not a case wherein the perso_,n….s,hown’as owner oft”<\/p>\n
the property in the revenue reco’r.ds;’_wa’s n’0.t”n_otEfie’d–~_an.d<\/p>\n
the Tribunai has proceeded’to”‘e,nquir’e into thvei’-rna\u00bbtte~r and’-i’<\/p>\n
pass the order. Even now a_i_so,~,_Thyampanna Ria\u00e9 who is
\nnone other than the wise re!ati.ve”–Vdf.,>\u00abappeiiant, has not
\njoined the appei-iant, to”q-uiesvtioyn.Qiinhtheirnpugned order.<\/p>\n
Indisputediyl-.,Th:ya–:Trpa’n_n1a_.R_aiiji.s’  co–owner of the<\/p>\n
propertyiiiiivni a:n’d_’is_a!so’ an elder member of the
\nfarniiy.’7Th*e record’ for the reievant period were<\/p>\n
standing Enauthe nar’ne”‘ofAthe said person. Indisputediy, the<\/p>\n
‘ “‘v.,ent’riesi\ufb01;=n’the reyieiinue records were not changed on<\/p>\n
 registered partition deed. Hence, the<\/p>\n
app,i’icant~’i\u00a7ie.ioVre the Land Tribunai was justified in making<\/p>\n
V’–Sri Th’aiy_ampanna Rai as the respondent iandiord, to whom<\/p>\n
,,,,”_,tht.-‘, :Tribunai issued the notice, conducted the enquiry in<\/p>\n
__t__he manner provided under the Karnataka Land Reforms<\/p>\n
Ruies and thereafter has passed the order. The entries in<\/p>\n
the revenue records show that the property was tenanted<\/p>\n
:\\ ‘.\n<\/p>\n
\/2<\/p>\n
15<\/span><\/p>\n
prior to 1.3.1974 and has thus vested in _\u00bb_:dn<\/p>\n
account of 8.44 of the Karnataka Land   <\/p>\n
vested land has been re-granted undejgt ‘df”the’Hs.aid<\/p>\n
Act. In the said view of the _r4_nattei1._”l’earneVd”V’Sing\u00e9ie <\/p>\n
was justified in dismissing  writ”p.etit’it)n,f\u00a7even on
\nmerits.\n<\/p>\n
For the 4fc’i’egoig1’\u00a7jVivreasojnis}-.Vtt.e ‘vzaijpeal lacks merit<\/p>\n
and hence,s’tan__d’:d.E.srn’issed;.._  <\/p>\n
Sd\/-~
\n‘fudge<\/p>\n
 …..\n<\/p>\n
fudge<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Sunitha A Shetty vs Thimmappa Rai on 6 January, 2010 Author: Manjula Chellur Gowda IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 6″ DAY OF JANUARY, PRESENT _ 3 V THE HON’BLE MRSJUSTICE MANJuLA..C’,\u00a3_i~E.LELj:RF.._ % T, L , THE MON’BLE MR. JUSTICE&A.NMEALLJAG\ufb013’PAL’A’:.L3Q\\,A@A>1Vt’ VVRFFAPPEALhg;\u00a765\/2@O9(LR\u00a73l,!. : ‘L BETWEEN: 1’ V V […]<\/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-5374","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSunitha A Shetty vs Thimmappa Rai on 6 January, 2010 - 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\/sunitha-a-shetty-vs-thimmappa-rai-on-6-january-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sunitha A Shetty vs Thimmappa Rai on 6 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sunitha-a-shetty-vs-thimmappa-rai-on-6-january-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-01-05T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-05-10T19:48:10+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=\"13 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sunitha-a-shetty-vs-thimmappa-rai-on-6-january-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sunitha-a-shetty-vs-thimmappa-rai-on-6-january-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sunitha A Shetty vs Thimmappa Rai on 6 January, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-01-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-05-10T19:48:10+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sunitha-a-shetty-vs-thimmappa-rai-on-6-january-2010\"},\"wordCount\":2079,\"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\\\/sunitha-a-shetty-vs-thimmappa-rai-on-6-january-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sunitha-a-shetty-vs-thimmappa-rai-on-6-january-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sunitha-a-shetty-vs-thimmappa-rai-on-6-january-2010\",\"name\":\"Sunitha A Shetty vs Thimmappa Rai on 6 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-01-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-05-10T19:48:10+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sunitha-a-shetty-vs-thimmappa-rai-on-6-january-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sunitha-a-shetty-vs-thimmappa-rai-on-6-january-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sunitha-a-shetty-vs-thimmappa-rai-on-6-january-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sunitha A Shetty vs Thimmappa Rai on 6 January, 2010\"}]},{\"@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":"Sunitha A Shetty vs Thimmappa Rai on 6 January, 2010 - 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\/sunitha-a-shetty-vs-thimmappa-rai-on-6-january-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sunitha A Shetty vs Thimmappa Rai on 6 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sunitha-a-shetty-vs-thimmappa-rai-on-6-january-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-01-05T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-05-10T19:48:10+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":"13 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sunitha-a-shetty-vs-thimmappa-rai-on-6-january-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sunitha-a-shetty-vs-thimmappa-rai-on-6-january-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sunitha A Shetty vs Thimmappa Rai on 6 January, 2010","datePublished":"2010-01-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-05-10T19:48:10+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sunitha-a-shetty-vs-thimmappa-rai-on-6-january-2010"},"wordCount":2079,"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\/sunitha-a-shetty-vs-thimmappa-rai-on-6-january-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sunitha-a-shetty-vs-thimmappa-rai-on-6-january-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sunitha-a-shetty-vs-thimmappa-rai-on-6-january-2010","name":"Sunitha A Shetty vs Thimmappa Rai on 6 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-01-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-05-10T19:48:10+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sunitha-a-shetty-vs-thimmappa-rai-on-6-january-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sunitha-a-shetty-vs-thimmappa-rai-on-6-january-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sunitha-a-shetty-vs-thimmappa-rai-on-6-january-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sunitha A Shetty vs Thimmappa Rai on 6 January, 2010"}]},{"@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\/5374","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=5374"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5374\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5374"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5374"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5374"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}