IN E HIG COURT OF NAT AT B GA ORE W PNO. 9/ 0
1
IN THE HIGH COUKT CF K'i\RI"ii\TfiKI'\ A? ElAN'GAi..ITJFiE.
DATED nus mm 318? DA'! on mncu. ages] ~ ";,:_
asmne _
THE HON'BL'E MR. JUSTICE 'N.»K.PATiVL'_VV'4" -{ %
BETWEEN: _
YALLAPPA SIO MUMSHAMAPPA ° %'
w vas. we MARiKUPPA%a
ROBERTSONPET HOBL! _ '_
BANGARPET TALLJK ~
KOLAR DiSTR|CT
_ _ _ V_ ..~,:i5ér+TioNER
(By 3:: ; N Y GUf2'U.I-'5RAK}§S_tVi. Ar.fm$«:;§.TE___; j; , " V'
ANT): 1 ' "
1 "" " H
BYIETS SECRETARY.' REVEIWE .DEF'T.,
M.-SL'.%U!LD!Nfi. LIR. \!E..EZ|_3.H.!
BANG-AVLGRE-1 ' *
2 THE LAND~.TRIi3uNAL '
:sAN:3ARPE':*-To' '
'azameanper
Kama Dasir.
'_ '°eENxATAR.§M;3PPA SIO YALLAPPA
" "~$IN¢E 'tiacéaéen av HIS LR AND WlFE
MAJOR, RIO MARIKUPPAM
' _ T ROBERTSONPET HOBLI
' L 1- BANGARPET TALUK
V . sun.) """sMT.'THumMAKb<A W10 LATE VENKATARAMAPPA
BZDLAR DISTRICT
wiuNrv'AMMAw" MUNi'fALLAPPA
IN THE HIGH coum" OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE w.PNc..:8199I2oa3
vmrr PETITION 30.18199.
\\ 2*»
IN THE flIGH §QUEi' OE KAR_f_N§,TAEA AT EANGALORE W.P.No. 18199f2Q03
2
4(A) SRINIVASAPPA @ SEENAPPA
S10 LA1'E MUNIYALLAPPA, MAJOR
RIC) KALLiKf)I5PA VILLAGE
BANGARPET TC}. KOLAR DISTRICT
(By aw; ASHA M. KUMBARAGERIMATH, HCGPFQR R153. " * ' 4'
R3 AND 4 SERVED ) ' = - '-
iii
THE CONSTiTUTif)N CF l'NT)lA F'RAYlNu,TO QUASH ViD.'-3 ANAL G DT.
24.2.2003 BYR2AS ILLEGAL. '
. mus wan PETITION com. bu my gamma, Tl-tlS"DAY. THE
QQURT MADE THE FOLLO'."!!NGi'-- ~ . .
VNo.TRB I 2532 I 70
passed by vide Annexure G as the
samejs 'iflegala andvwithtduti jurisdiction, has preeen.ed the
deceased third respondent Sri.
L -‘\]enltatererj1appa, now represented by legal
I and wife Thimmakka, resident .-..~:=
.p.””‘.avu1a3’iedt’r355am, Robertson pet Hobii, Bangarpet Taluk,
‘ W l.l.(plar District, hd filed an a/r/nended application in Ferm
A
/
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE W.P.No.l8l 993003
Resetéatoezstiet’ L
runs wart PETITION us FlLEDtJl¥l’DER ART:c:LEe fitND”22?”jOF
INTH IGCURTOFKNT T GLO W..o.8903
No.7 for registration of occupancy rights in respectjof.
land in Sy.Nos.77l1, 77/2, 3313, 5511, 37/1,
and ..5!–.. measuring ….., ‘Al, 05, m, 14, 13,96 an.-‘H34
guntae respectively measuring tOt:a:’l|yI:-E:”.::V
guntes or 02 acres 20 guntaeaituateiiiet. 1Niariktipparn Vi
Village, Robertson pet Hobli. hd
unis -u g : _.I;: _. —- — ‘
u fa. consider
COM
II!
.:- “_r~ff
Bangarpet, in view] of thgeeariiIer.:oréi’erVVofrernand passed
by this Ccur:i:;” tyoiaijeigriatter afresh and to
‘ID
or
in
‘ID
13
1:)
1::
:2
ll}
aficrdingV”‘opportunVit3r’ in pursuance of the
direction thieA’Coiirt in earlier round of litigation,
I-‘i’V1v.V’n1atte”ri:’Wac itakenfl the second respondent for
_rmpc’ndent’– Tribunal, Bengarpet has proceeded to
without conducting proper enquiry and
considering the relevant material available on file
…..ll
8 WBII
.._L…..
e the e ry f’ und in the record of rights and has
/
zé-:_._.
/
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE W.P.No. 181992003
THE HIG COU K A TE G L . . 0 9! 003
4
even gone to the extent of registering the occupancy
rights in respect of Sy.No.85I3 measuring
‘vs
I BVGH F
not filed any application in Fonjn
. said land. Further, it is thearcase’-ofy’
Land Tribunal has categodcallgreccrdedafincling while
name of the oizendorgctlthe been recorded
in khate¢Yla’r’§-,««..;§cld’i}1n«.Ig.;;;i~._gqltit?ator’s column and except
that, the vendortfiggthepeiitioner was cuitivting the said
landas on 13″ March ‘l But, on the basis of the oral
_etaternent..of one “” Krishnappa to the effect that, the
was culti-{rating the said lands with Sri. Muniyeilappa
~ eince”30 to 40 years, the Land Tribunal came to the
conclusion that, the applicant, late Sri. Venlcataramappa
must ue: cuukv
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE W.P.No.l8l99l2D03
dmmeed 9’-if reepcnden =uen»*!?§¢!..!g?i.:jhe :«;.=.e,
i’NmH G CO T F T T (3 L0 . ._ 0 18 99f200
5
occupancy rights can be registered in his favour. when
the Land Tribunal has categorically recordedee-”
that, the name of petitioner has been the”
.431.-
record of r”‘hte ‘e on 1 ‘ March 1974,:-ttie cie,t’e._o’n
all the tenanted land vested’ in_GoQernment,:
accepting the oral evidence adduced_V_by “a eeneigntiouring
land owner, one V Son of
1.
1univeni<"r"ppa_,=hs rights in
E,
favour of third vre'.:iV-'4;:go'r:d,e_r_ii:~.._herein _without conducting
proper enqaxiryfiihentt, ooritpigiing the re!e.e.n..
pr-vieioree " the""e4.Leno.._f'%-forrne 'ct and Ruies.
Therefore, being, :Vegorievied by the same, petitioner
* «.hAereirrt°* err neceeeiteted to present the instant writ
'petiti_o"n. tiéfiekingvigappropriete reliefs, as etete.-'1.' supra.
r hear" Sri. Nagarej eiong with Sri. Guru
' " — Prelgasiiv ii'
A After careful evaluation of the entire' material
Ifjaveilable on record, includi.
cg the crder ooesed by m
/':°___
/
IN THE It-HG!-I COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE W.P.N.0. 18199/2003
that, an therwc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KAgfl_AT&A AT EANGALOQE fl.B.[;lQ. l§19§!/2003
6
Land Tribunal, Bengarpet, it is manifest on the
I-L.
thfi 33316 that, Lin: :3 ‘ [Id luupuiuu ‘II i’la$’*._tI’§V35_I!3D»._._ .
beyond the scope and purview of the ,re|event’ ;§mv:eso;;s it ”
of the Kernetaka Land Reforms Act enfd’~ defies;
in serious miscarriage of in
r’spcnd”t, without cenducfingiiiehplfoper’ encuiry strict
compliance with Rule of Rules and
without complisng of issued by this
..-o..-rt, he- ‘i§rpugned order. As a
matter ‘:55 learned counsel for
petitioner’, ‘point No.2, the Land Tribunal
hespysgpeorificeiilyiireferred intemel page 11 ink page 83
-..-3
iipetiiicnerh;ei:s’At;jeen recorded. The oniy reason -assigned
V for of occupancy rights in favour of deceased
«respondent is that, the iege! reprmentefive-.;. c. we
‘ ind ownr have not produced any other substantive
14″ rneterial except the RTC extracts and have not examined
1
/4,
/'”‘”–*
THE In H :3. mm’ or K Arm Amm A.-_ ssueneoee W¢l5,Nc..18199l2003
.;.am.- a. vw.-. – –..–u-u.–. — —
G CO TOP N T T GALO N0. 8′ 9 003
7
any independent witnesses, to substantiate their
that, they are the earlier owners of the lands %
es en 1″ Memh. ‘i9?4 -== entail’; ‘- en the ‘send in ”
;u.! 1,: V
the record of rights has a preeurnptiiue “{I:i”i.f__li&3’_’«
Section 133 of the Kernataka Laxndi’Referrns’}Ket;:..,_:Vit *
not the case of Land Ti_’_ibunai said in
‘Ilia manna J-In en;
3 [la
.1 – …1-“.;_.§.¢ .u..3- -4 ed”
l.II I In ul Iu V Iluul I V
T ‘gm withem a y
authorizetion. given much
importance; by the adjacent
land ewner, ef ML.n1.enka..eppe
th’t, the third had cuitivated the iand under
Sri. Muniye’i’ieppa,eineeh3t) to 40 years. It is significant
ate ‘itdte1.”ehereA’ it is stated that, the land was
h«–e.t!,.-.Z~..e1.’ve’d..bt,! “thi:’d reependent since 30 to 49 yeam, but
under \§:het§’~’eapacity he was cultivating the said land,
.it,.:wheti1eVr”as a tenant or not and the mode of lease held
‘bQ”th’ird respondent are all not coming ferth frem the
|l.l’_l.l_ _
riburaei. vmeut verifying
IN THE HIGH COURT 0:? KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE W.P.Ne.l8i99l2003
—-.–n.-ualiunnu ‘uI|l| Illnnnnsnn 1A.:-nun:-hl\_’E| I-Uses I Alli’ Trihllflfil hlhfi
I 9! UH all LIIUEIG uapuleta, IJIE Lflllu Illllllllfll.-‘.._’|lCa
slipped into n error in registering the ocoupeney_’inV
favour of the deceased third K
represent
— –_
He .1.’ third rspondertttdily “it wee
the Land Tribunal to have reoordede heady
to under what capacity the {late Sri.
Venkataramappa sinoe 30 to 40
-me-‘== The Lend Trib-we
Jé I3. II
evidence __ owner, without
vefifyivngti third respondent was
culfiveting4’theV:’viend:ee’tehe’nt as on 1*’ March 1974 and
………….r..i.’ .1. __r;;.. .|….’a.L,,-‘..|. ..|…n…. …L….. 4.1…. l_……| ……4…..| ..
II II U! [fit] [JIIIVJI-‘I. ._Lll I (Jill , WIIUII HIE [GNU V I. U Ill
l’ies…,r.:eroceeded to passed the impugned
3l’here is no finding recorded by the Land
order e- t. whether the lend in eeeetion is
Avestectgin Government as on 15’ ivlarch 1974. Further,
x”V’r.._’enother error oomn’iitted by the Land Tribunal in passing
d ~ – the impugned order is that, in-the preamble portion of the
/g-
/{:7/______.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT EANGAL ‘ RTE WP.’ o.I81-991700
IN EH! COUR OF NA A G R .P._.1 99H]
9
order, it can be seen that, the deceased third respondent
has not filed the application seeking regietreficn’: ”
In wan
eeoupency righfi m leepxt of S*’.i~ic.35!. Q4
guntee, but the Land tribunal has:proe.ee?ded._.tc
occupancy rights in respect ef_’the ee’id’V’euNe)i”
Therefore: on going thrcugh al%l._thjeee._aepecte..l__iteian be
1],
conciuded mt, ther
is theprtfffriierfeiiéftién of “ti-ad cm
the part of the impugned
°”d°” i” 35 #51i*?’i?’*ifii§’£A”t3l§§l’§-lhinto”consideration the
grcund eria! e eilabie en filei
it has erder. Therefore, it proves
beyondall reaeoneblel’doiibte that. the Land Tribunal has
ill’noti ll:veri:aedll%carefuiiy the Form No.7 filed by. third
. which numbers, what is the extent of the lands,
_Therefore, it is manifest on the face of the order
by Land Tribunal that, the Land Tribunal has
1′ committed a grave error reeuiting in eerioue rnieeer”=ie§e
I
/%:~__.___.
/
IN THE HIGH COURT op KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE W.PNo. I81 9912003
of justice and in totai non compiiance of the mandatory
provisions of the Land. Reforms Act 3
particularly Rule 17 of the Land Reforms ”
Section 34 of the Land Revenue Act Thar-“atcr :
of non conduct of proper enquiry_.and”for’*not it
proper order in pursuance of this
Court in earlier round ct”lifigationsuaszjffittte’considered
View that, at anystretcii’ Fpugned.
order passeidr Land Tribunal
cannot is liable to be set
aside.
Havinglregardto’ the facts and circumstances
“of’fi$e’*case,v. as above, the writ petition filed by
petitioner’ dvisposed of as follows:
If – …..: .. ‘ ‘…. 4’.’……I .. …. ‘.1. .. .’
‘ .11.. the WM? pufifiuu m’uu by pufifrufiuf IS
t I %_ elicited in part;
II] The order passed by second
.respondent— Land Tribunal, Bangarpet dated
5
IN THE HIGH comm’ or KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE W.P.No.l 8| oiiizocia
IN {LEE EIQH COQBJ QB QELJATAEA AT §ANQAI_,fi fl.E.flo. $1221. 3903
ll
24″‘ February 2003 bearing No.TRB: 2532.-70%
on the file of the Land Tribunal, Bangafpsl; A’
Kola! Distnfct is ..s.-s-by ss. ssids ssd.:’jiéis’«~.:: 4.
matter stands ramittad back i’? vi’ 4 ‘A
Bangarpet, for reconsidiiraiion ‘afrssh_ and-[_fs
take ap_propn’ste decisian_..inj »vscsg:dsncs.._9V!lF.I
law, in strict csn1piisnss’~ i’%i5ie,ii~?V of ” a
Land Refnrnfis._ 34 of
the meeeeeeeesee: ieeeidiepose of the
same” as exgss ,:’t’;’!.2uL-‘..ly as pass.-…s, susr
sffiirding’ eeeeeeei to petitioner and
/Fsflondsnise – T3 find 4 or their legal
V’ – _ “l:riépresa?ntsti\iss;””ss expeditiously as possible,
A”‘maffer’-.lA«7″hss been pending adjudication
.. , the patties since several decades. ,-
lly Further petitioner is ,t_M_annitte._d in
sabmii his w’rFt’f’n su”r”ni’sion, aiong with the –
/7
/____#.
IN THE. HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE W.P.No. I81 99f2’003
IN TH I COURT OF TA L WP. 991′ 0
connected documents before the second
respondent — Land Tribunal, within a “
of fear -.-.’e=-*- -“M
copy of this order. ‘ 1 _ ‘
IV] Further, it
Bon_o,rpot is heroby difoctsd ‘to .W~t.eihi
wfidon submission and
proceed the
direction’ referred
nhnmi
Iuaufvcvuan .V V -‘
IN THE HIGH comrr on KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE W.P.No.18l99i1003