Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Shanthabai vs The State Of Karnataka Reptd By Its Secy on 31 January, 2020

Author: Suraj Govindaraj

Bench: Suraj Govindaraj

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                   DHARWAD BENCH

       DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2020

                        BEFORE

       THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

         WRIT PETITION NO.24150/2003 (LR)


BETWEEN:

 1.     SMT. SHANTABAI
        W/O: MARTHANDRAO LAD (DECEASED)

 2.     SMT. URMILADEVI
        W/O:LATE ARVIND LAD
        SINCE DECEASED BY LR's.

 2A.    UJWALA D/O: ARVIND LAD
        AGE: 42 YEARS,

 2B.    SHEETAL D/O: ARVIND LAD
        AGE: 39 YEARS,

        BOTH ARE R/O: KOLHAPUR,
        MAHARASHTRA.

 2C.    NEETAL W/O: SAMEER GAIKWAD
        AGE: 36 YEARS, R/O: MUMBAI,
        MAHARASHTRA.


 3.     SMT. ANURADHA W/O: ASHOK SASANE
        AGE: 68 YEARS,
                            2


4.     SHRI SHIVAJI S/O: MARTHANDRAO LAD,
       (SINCE DECEASED BY HIS L.Rs)

4A.    CHANDAN S/O: LATE SHIVAJI LAD
       AGE: MAJOR, R/O: H.N.4285,
       JALGAR GALLI, BELAGAVI.

5.     SMT. CHAYA W/O: LATE RAMCHANDRA LAD,
       AGE: 43 YEARS,

6.     SMT. SHASHIKALA W/O: SURESH KOKATE,
       AGE: 60 YEARS,

7.     SHRI VIJAY S/O: MARTHANDRAO LAD
       AGE: 75 YEARS,

8.     SMT. SEEMA W/O: SRIRANG PATIL
       AGE: 48 YEARS,

9.     SMT. ARUNA D/O: MARTHANDRAO LAD,
       AGE: 57 YEARS,

       (PETITIONER NOs.1 TO 9 ARE REP.BY
       GPA HOLDER SHRI DEEPAK
       S/O: ASHOK SASANE
       AGE: 36 YEARS, R/O; CTS NO.4666,
       BADAKAL GALLI, BELAGAVI,
       DIST: BELAGAVI.
                                           PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. DINESH M.KULKARNI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
       REP. BY ITS SECRETARY
       DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,
       BENGALURU.
                           3


2.    THE LAND TRIBUNAL BELAGAVI
      REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN AT BELAGAVI.

3.    TATOBA BAVU PATIL
      SINCE DECEASED BY LRs.

3A.   BALU S/O: TATOBA PATIL
      AGE: 40 YEARS,
      DELETED AS PER ORDER DATED 23.01.2020.

3B.   GAJANAN S/O: TATOBA PATIL
      AGE: 35 YEARS,

3C.   SMT. SUREKHA D/O: TATOBA PATIL,
      AGE: 32 YEARS,

3D.   REKHA D/O; TATOBA PATIL
      SINCE DECEASED BY LR

3D(A).     MAHESH S/O: NANDU BHOSALE
           AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS
           R/O; RAM NAGAR, KANAGARALI KH
           BELAGAVI.

3E.   KAMALA D/O; TATOBA PATIL
      AGE: 29 YEARS,

3F.   LAXMIBAI W/O: TATOBA PATIL
      SINCE DECESED REP.BY
      RESPONDENT NOS.3A TO 3E.

4.    SHRI SADANAND S/o; BAVU PATIL
      AGE: MAJOR,

5.    GOPAL S/o; BAVU PATIL,
      AGE: MAJOR,
      RESPONDENTS 3A TO 5 ARE
      R/O: KANGRALI BADRUKH,
      TQ & DIST:BELAGAVI.
                          4


6.   SMT. SHANTABAI
     W/O: KRISHNA HIRAPPACHE
     AGE: MAJOR, R/O: HINDALAGA,
     TQ & DIST: BELAGAVI.

7.   SMT. MANJULA @ LAXMI
     W/O: BARMU PATIL,
     AGE: MAJOR, R/O: KANGRALI,
     BADRUKH,
     TQ & DIST: BELAGAVI.

                                        ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI V.S.KALASURMATH, ADV. FOR R1 & R2
 SRI MAHESH WODEYAR, ADV. FOR R3(B, C & E)
      AND R3D(A)
 SRI NAVEEN CHATRAD, ADV. FOR R4 TO R7
 R3(A) - DELETED)


     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING
TO ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI TO
QUASH THE ORDER NO.KH SR 8 + 5 + + 30 DATED
11.04.2003 PASSED BY THE LAND TRIBUNAL BELGAUM
i.e. RESPONDENT NO.2 VIDE ANNEXURE-F AND ETC.


     THIS   PETITION   COMING     ON    FOR   HEARING
INTERLOCUTORY      APPLICATION         THIS   DAY,   THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
                               5


                            ORDER

Writ Petition No.24201/2003 had been connected to W.P.No.24150/2003 vide order dated 06.03.2007 of this Court.

2. Sri Dinesh Kulkarni, learned counsel appearing for the land owners states that a common order had been passed on 11.04.2003 by the Land Tribunal, wherein the claim of the petitioners in W.P.No.24201/2003 claiming occupancy rights as regards item Nos.1 and 2 properties therein had been rejected. Hence, petitioners in W.P.No.24201/2003 have challenged the order dated 11.04.2003 as regards the rejection of item Nos.1 and 2 properties therein by way of W.P.No.24201/2003. He submits that the land owners have challenged the grant of occupancy rights as regard item No.3, property in the order dated 11.04.2003 by filing W.P.No.24150/2003. 6

3. In the above circumstances, Sri Dinesh Kulkarni, counsel submits that though W.P.No.24150/2003 and W.P.No.24201/2003 arise out of the same order i.e. order dated 11.04.2003 of the land tribunal, they can be disconnected. Since there is no commonality of interest between the claimants in both the petitions. Hence, W.P.No.24201/2003 is ordered to be disconnected from W.P.No.24150/2003.

4. A compromise petition has been filed by the petitioner Nos.1, 2, 2A, 2B, 2C, 3, 4, 4A, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 represented by their General Power of Attorney Holder Sri Deepak S/O; Ashok Sasane, and respondent Nos.3B, 3C, 3D, 3DA, 3E, 4, 5, 6 and 7.

5. A copy of the compromise petition has been served on Sri Sunil Desai, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in W.P.No.24201/2003.

7

6. Sri Dinesh Kulkarni, learned counsel for the land owners submits that the compromise petition is filed in W.P.No.24150/2003 restricted to item No.3 of the order of the Land Tribunal dated 11.04.2003 and would not affect the rights of the petitioners in W.P.No.24201/2003.

7. Sri Sunil Desai, states that as the compromise petition does not affect the rights of the petitioners in W.P.No.24201/2003 and does not relate to or touch upon the lands in question in W.P.No.24201/2003, he would have no objection for the compromise to be recorded.

8. The terms of the compromise were enquired with from the Power of Attorney Holder of petitioners as also the individual respondents who are present before this Court. On such enquiry, they confirmed the contents of the compromise petition as filed. The Power of Attorney Holder has been identified by the counsel for the 8 petitioners, respective respondents have been identified by their respective counsels on record. The learned counsels have also filed Aadhar Cards of all the parties, which bears the signature of the parties and are identified and countersigned by the respective counsels.

9. The compromise petition is taken on record. The parties have submitted that they have settled the disputes and have agreed to equally share the land subject matter of the proceedings before the Land Tribunal i.e. Item No.3 of the order dated 11.04.2003, which measures 2 acres 6 guntas. Therefore, the petitioners would be entitle to 43 guntas and the respondents would be entitle to 43 guntas.

10. A sketch dealinating the location has also been attached to the compromise petition. The property dealinated in green bearing the noting Part-A goes to the share of the petitioners and the area denoted in Red colour dealinated as Part-B goes to the share of 9 respondents as per the agreement arrived at. The petitioners and respondents in the above writ petition having agreed to the above terms of the compromise request for a modification of the order of the tribunal dated 11.04.2003.

11. The order of the tribunal dated 11.04.2003 is modified in terms of the compromise. The respondents having given up their rights over the Part-A property, the same is deleted from the proceedings before the Land Tribunal. The grant of occupancy rights in favour of respondents is restricted to Part-B property. The matter is remanded back to the Tribunal to complete all the formalities and administrative work in terms of the above modification which shall be completed by the Tribunal within a period of three months from the receipt of the certified copy of this order. 10

12. The order of the tribunal insofar as that relating to item Nos.1 and 2 properties therein and relating to W.P.No.24201/2003 stands un-disturbed.

Writ Petition No.24150/2003 is accordingly disposed of in terms of the compromise.

Registry is directed to place the copy of this order in W.P.No.24201/2003.

Sd/-

JUDGE msr