Karnataka High Court
Smt. Renuka W/O Bharma Shinde vs State Of Karnataka on 3 September, 2010
Author: Mohan Shantanagoudar
Bench: Mohan Shantanagoudar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
CIRCUIT BENCH A'
ped
* DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 3 DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 3010~
BEPORE
THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAN SHA
ITANAGOUDAR
WOP.NO.65360/ - 2010 KL R- "RES
BETWEEN:
I. SMT. RENUKA, W/ O BHARMA SH INDE _
AGE 52 YRS, OCC: AGRIC LT URE ,
R/O WAGHWADI HE VILLAGE, _
POST SANTIBASTWAD
TALUKA AN DISTT. BELGA j
Ka
SR. PS YRS. O 2MA SHINDE
AGE 25 YRS., OCC! "AG RIC JLTOURE
» AGRICULTURE
LL JGE.
7: TIBASTW ive
Ld st PE LAGAUM,
we PETITIONERS
(BY SRL R MKU LEARN LADY)
cepa ay
ARM LEW dt
Me
Denes
4.
6
oo
oe 5 A
THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS.
BELGAUM AND EX OPPICIO TECHNICAL
ASSISTANT L, RVEY TO THE
DEPUTY COMM LR, OFFICE OF
DEPUTY COR IMISSIONER BELGAUM,
THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF LAND-R HOCORDS,
OFFICE OF THE TAHSILDAR, oe
TALUKA AND DIST, BELQUAM.
TAHSILDAR, LAND SU RV EY DEPART MENT
TALURKA AND DIST. BELGAUM... --
POST S. AN TIBAST W AD, TO! AND DIST BELGUAM,
SRI PRADEEPKUMAR €,
AGE MAJOR, OCE&: BUSINESS
R/O CLUB ROAD). RE LGAL M.
SRI pRAViN § LLOHAR ¢
{A JOR, OC AGRICULTURE
SHWADE VILLAGE,
R/ aM ¥
oo POST SANT IB AST WAD, DIST. BELGAUM.
mip
TWADE ( VILLA AGE.
TBASTWAD.
Le RESPONDENTS
ru, AGA FOR R1 TO Ra
UE COURT ORDER DATED 2
fae
THIS PETITION 1S PILED UNDE S ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PR: Av NG PO SET ASIDE. THE
2 NDORSEMENT ISSUED By THE RESPONDENT NO.2 ON 1 fFL20 1Q
PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE M LAND ETC
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY ul
B GROUP, THIS DAY. THE COURT ¥ MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The endorsement An nexuire "M" Gated OL/O772010- issued by the second respondent. 'is called in question in this writ petition. By the Sai nao "the petitioners are ivformecd by the second respori iden! thar their appeal cannot be considered on m neries an 'view of the 'earlier order passed by second responden on 26 fPy 2006 in case No. APC /Phodi/SR 74 /06-07. A & Con. vv of the over rt dat ted 29/11/2006 is produced at Annexure "py tothe writ 'pethion. The said order Annexure "D" clearly reveals that the petitioners were not parties to the > Tahsildar, pepe Fomwns, said appeal, It was filed by six persons against t Belgaum ~clainiine. ownershi p to RS No.2. since the iMoners are not party to the appeal and as the order ~ Annexure "D" is passed by the second respondent without ~ Botice to the peti Honers, there is no hurdle for the second "Fespondent to hear the appeal filed by the petitioners on merits. While deciding the appeal filed by the stilioners, all the persons interested in R.S.No 22 er the purchasers of the said property may have to be heard in the matter.' In view of the a pove, the following order is. m: ade:
oe The impugned endorsement, Stands -q lashed, The petitioners shall represent the APP ve al memo before the second be respondent or file a fresh, appeal iL 'they chose so before the second respondent) within four w vock's fom this day. If the appeal papers ars tepre niee or filed' afre sh, the same shal] be heard ori merit S anc ordance with law by the second petitioner 'after notice to all, the-intere sted parties. Status quo to be maintained Hi) then.