Late Hereshakunada Basappa Dead By His ... vs The State Of Karnataka on 30 May, 2022

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Late Hereshakunada Basappa Dead By His ... vs The State Of Karnataka on 30 May, 2022

Bench: N.S.Sanjay Gowda

                         1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

        DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF MAY, 2022

                      BEFORE

      THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA

         W.P.No.10373/2013 (LR-SEC 48A)

BETWEEN:

1.     LATE HERESHAKUNADA BASAPPA
       DEAD BY HIS LRS.

(a)    SRI. RAMESH,
       S/O LATE HERESHAKUNADA BASAPPA,
       AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,

(b)    SRI. RENUKAPPA,
       AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
       S/O LATE HERESHAKUNADA BASAPPA,

(c)    SRI. BASAVARAJA,
       AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
       S/O LATE HERESHAKUNADA BASAPPA,

(d)    SRI. MANJAPPA,
       AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
       S/O LATE HERESHAKUNADA BASAPPA,

       ALL ARE RESIDING AT
       KUDUREGANI VILLAGE,
       HALESORABA POST,
       SORABA TALUK,
       SHIVAMOGA DISTRICT.
                                    ... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI.H.S.KALYAN KUMAR, ADV.)
                           2

AND:

1.     THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
       REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
       DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,
       M.S. BUILDING,
       BANGALORE - 01.

2.     THE LAND TRIBUNAL SORBA TQ.,
       SHIMOGA DISTRICT,
       REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN.

3.     GRAMASTHRU KUDUREGANI,
       REPRESENTED BY ADHYSKHA
       GRAMABIVRUDI SAMITI
       KUDUREGANI GRAMA,
       SORABA TALUK,
       SHIMOGA DISTRICT - 577 429.
                                     ... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.A.R.SRINIVAS, AGA FOR R1 AND R2;
    R3 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)


     THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH
THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 14.3.1981 PASSED BY THE
SECOND RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE - D IN RESPECT
OF SY.NO.37 MEASURING 2 ACRE 20 GUNTAS IS
CONCERNED AND ETC.,


     THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING IN 'B' GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
                                3
                           ORDER

1. In this writ petition, the order passed on 14.03.1981 is challenged. In other words 31 years after the impugned order was passed, this writ petition is filed.

2. The impugned order indicates that father of the petitioners was actually present on 14.03.1981, when the impugned order was passed.

3. In my view, since, the impugned order was passed in the presence of the father of the petitioners and the father of the petitioners chose not to challenge the order during his life time and the petitioners thereafter, for nearly 14 years after their father's death, chose not to challenge the order passed by the Land Tribunal disentitles them to file this writ petition after such an unfortunate delay. There is therefore no justification in entertaining this writ petition and the writ petition is rejected.

Sd/-

JUDGE GH

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court