Karnataka High Court
Smita W/O Gopalrao Patavardhan vs The State Of Karnataka By Its Secretary on 27 June, 2008
Equivalent citations: 2009 (2) AIR KAR R 153
Author: N.K.Patil
Bench: N.K.Patil
K.
-.r"_:,"---v-
:.g. IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKIA AT BANGALQRE W.P.Eo.4993!2€)G6
®
IN THE HEGH COURT or KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 271'}! DAY OF
ms HON'B!..E MR. JusrIcE&;K.éé;i9:a;
wan' PETITION %1wo;49«9*$m ?'éL_;l,~:.1 Ak j i
BETWEEN .. " " ' '
1 SM£TA ' . V V' V.
WIO GOPAL mo PA?Av».RaHAN-~ ._ =
AGEGOYEARS, '
occ: HousEHoLD,wcm<--- '- .
RIOBUDHAGAGN 5 _ " --._ V '
TALUK: MiRixJ .. ;
o:s"r:sANr3L1
(MAHARASHTRA sure}
2 AMIT -------- _ '~::,_ ~
Sit) GOPAL mo PATAVARDHM} :,
AGEMOYEARS *
occ; AGRICULTURE
RIOSUDHAGAON, '
TALUK; MIRAJ
DEST: SANGALI _ _ ~ _
{MAHARASHTRA :;+:TA:1.?_) .. _
'V ..... PETITIONERS
(By sn. K B Af}H_'1f'AD5g(, ~. _
1 'YH_é'S'TATEOF KARNA'~£'M_()L= 'T
emits sacrzerarzxr, . '
.EEVEN;£EvDEPARTMENT
M.s.BU.iL{):NG. _
';BANGALQi-_EE--Q1."~._
I " 1 "':iHE.'LA:s;c: T'R-EBUNKL
' =.Am«:~u_. BY ET8 CHAIRMAN
. ATHANL w_.uK; ATHAN1
._ 933.1; BELGAUM
IN THE HIGH COURT {)9 KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE W'.P.Nu.4993J2£)i36
IN THE HiGH CGURT OP KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE W.P.No.4993I2£}06
3(a)
4(a)
46))
4(6)
2
GURUPAD
S10 TAMMANNA HALYAL
SMGE DECEASE BY HIS Lfi
TUKURAM SK) GURUPAD HALYAL
AGE 22 YEARS OCC: AGRICULTURE
RIO KRISHNA KITTUR
TALUK ATHANI, DIST BELGAUM
GUNSU SIG BHIMAPPA wAoA<s;§§Lé '
sauce neceasm av ms ans, _
KRISHNA, sro. euwou WAQAGALE, .
AGE: 30 YEARS, * .. "
OCC: AGRICULTURE,
Ric). KRISHNA KITTLIR.
TQ: ATHANI, -.
DIST: BELGAUM.
smuu SIC! GUNDiJ'Vu§nDAGALE»__ " _ AV ' V
AGE 25 x'gARs o<_:c; AGRICULFJRE
Rio KFil5Hii£A K.£TTUR,1 TALUK ATHANE
on$T~3'a=;,G.A;.:ss.4 "
RAJU fim>".§sALE
- AGE 26 was OCQAGRICULTURE
R70 KRiSH'I-IA KSTTUR'
TALLIK ATHANI "
' » _DiST SELQAUM
':'
BASEAPPA 'RUDRAPPA PATIL
A av ms LRS
. _5{a)
Ai$.s'ANs¢A. SJO RUDRAPPA PATIL
AGE---,sa YEARS, occ; AGRICULTURE
RIC} KRISHNA KITTUR
?ALUK ATHANI
" - ..DiST BELGAUM
TAMMANNA SIO RUDRAPPA PATSL
AGE 5-B YEARS OCC: AGRICULTURE
FUD KRISHNA KITTUR
TALUK ATHANI
DIST BELGAUM
IN THE HIGH COURT 0;: KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE W.P.No.4993f2006
" ' -- - 3, BABU sxo TATOBA KUDACH!
3(3) TATOBA, , KUDACHI,
D~I'['I{EHIGHCC1JRTOFKARN!€f'AKAfl §AI'_G_&Q_lLEfl $0.499 3%
3
5(c) suwaeoum,
SIOIRUDRAPPA PATIL,
AGE: 56 YEARS,
ooc: AGREULTURE,
R10. KRiSHNA «mun,
TO: ATHANI, .
DlST: BELGAUM.
5(d) SMTGOWRAWWA,
WIOMALAGOUDA PATIL,'
AGE:54YEARS,
OCC: ,
RIO. KRISHNA KJTTUR.
TO: ATHANI,
DIST: BELGAUM; _ ..
5(9) an-umaeouoa, '
s:o.BAsAeowoAp.a.nL;. _ V V 'V
AGE:52'YEA._RS.:
OCC:;fiGFf%QULTURE,§ -
-KIFTUR. A
Tc: ATHfiN£;"'--._ J V'
0451.: BELGAUM. ..
6. BASA' ' RAG!
i-us ms
6(a}__ !RAF'PA, saosamsunv BASARAGI
: ' LAAGE47'VE_ARSOCI::AGRiCUL11JRE
I KRIS!-lNM'x£'5'i"UR
TALUK ATHANI
_ L'2!ST.vBELGAUM
AGE 56 YEARS occ: AGRlCUi.T|JRE
" KRISHNA «mun
~~ V TALUK ATHANI
mar BELGAUM
SINOEECEASEBYHISLRS.
AGE 50 YARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE
R10 KRISHNA KITTUR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE w.1>.No.49-33./zoos
INTHE
*;?mw
8(5)
9(a)
9(9)
TALUK ATHANI
DiST BELGAUM
BALAKRISHNA SK} ANNASAB KUDACHI
AGE 44 YEARS OCC: AGRICULTURE
RIO KRISHNA K£TTUR
TALUK ATHANI
DiST BELGAUM
PARASHURAM 5:0 ANNAPPA xtibacm « ._
SW05 DEAD BY Hf-'S LRS
GYANABA we PARAsHuaAM--- KUDACHI .
AGE 46 YEARS occ; AGRICULTURE
RIO KRISHNA KiTTUR . _
TALUK ATHANI . '-
azsr BELGAUM V
SADASHIV 3:0 PARAé;aURAr.éV1'KéJaA:cHé*_'
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE W.P.No.4993i2{)06
4
AGE 44 YEARS occ; AGRtcu:.T2;RE 1 '-
RlOKRl3+_-£NA._KiTT;UR _ _
TALUK;ATHAb5l
DlST4.F§ELGe'§Uh£_ - ~ '
THE s£ét=i:;".:.a:,V 9.30-.A{c;au:*sn-from GFFICER
'qH.3,c:. ATHANI».
TALUK ATHANL = _
DISIBELGAUM '
ma SPECJALVTAHEKSILDAR
._A?HANITALU:( ....
" ass? asnsaum
" .{{e'~k séi.:~%Am€3A SHIVANANDAPPA,
H$GP FOR_Rft€, R2, R10 8:11;
SRi.H.THlPPERUDRAPPA, AEVOCATE FOR RBA,
R4.A¢{3, R5 A-E, R8(A) AND R? ;
OQWO-I'
RESPONDENTS
.. Si2l.P.MAHESH, ADVOCATE FOR R8(A--B) R.9{A}&{B}}
Ti-{£8 WRiT PETITION {S FILED UNDER ARTKJLES 226 AND 227 OF
HETHE CONSTITUHON OF I'N£3iA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED
ORDER BY R2 LAND TRIBUNAL ATHANI WDE ANN~G DY. 23.6.77 AND TO
QUASH THE IMPUGNEB CERHFICATE iSSUED IM FORM NOJG BY THE
SPL. TAHSILDAR ATHANI, DT. 30.11.04 VIDE ANN»N IN FAVOUR OF R-3 TO
9, AND DIRECT THE R2 i.e. LAND TRIBUNAL ATHANI TO REJECT THE
{N THE HIGH COURT 0!: KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE W.P.No.4993J2GD6
IN THE HEGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE W.P.No.4993f2006
8
the occupancy rights in favour of the applicantsittierein
solely on the basis that, the Power of i?totder._.
behalf of the legal heirs_,...of_
Patavardhan has sent an apotioation on
1976 stating that, he oojeotioni¢j'to"':..§fég'ister the
applicant as occupant. fiafi:er'*"vi::onduoting
enquiry, the Trtbunaihas 'tegj'iste:et3vAAthe'_'occupancy rights
by its order dated favour of applicants
by learned counsel for
petitioners in petition is that, there is no
n,t}tit:ea to Vxpetitioners and that, the impugned order
Iheeitpasaed behind the back of petitioners
= ,VhL:ni|até.tatIyA;.:='"it is petitioners' was that, as soon as it
oametovtheir knowiedge, immediatety they have rushed
it Court and presented flue instant writ petition on
315* March 20% no that, the delay in presenting fine
instant writ petition is bogs fide in nature and not
/___,,,__,_,__
IN THE mos comm" op i(AR3*éA'I'AI(A AT BANGALORE W.P.No.4993f2{1-()6
{N THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE W.P.No.4993f2006
1}
the suit lands in the case should be allowed and -paid to
the applicants heirs and rest half share
other landlord. Therefore, me
taking note of the le'tterlr:epres_§enfation ,_ day' in
September 1976, sent: by of.
Attorney Holder, Sri.B.K. found at ink
page as in the "passed the
impugned 4.:v.,-3,;-dew. said specific
appearing for
pefitaal-we at the fiireshoid itself.
learned counsel appearing for
petitioners and AA'i._i'leairned counsel appearing for
.....
V T. careful evaluation of the original rmwds ~',ali:*ailab|e by learned Govmnment Pleader, , flwreataibare, and the order passed by the Land Tribunal, ii 'veiat emergm is that, in fact, due notice has been served by the Land Td m me basis of fine enizy IN HIGH COURT or KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE W.P.No.4993f2{l66 IN THE HIGH COURT OF AT AT BANG W.P.No.4993i2006 }2 found in the record of rights and the same has aiso been duly received and acknowiedged on 25"' May 1977 by one Sri. B.K. Patil who ciairne to be the eeneraz of Attorney holder of the legal heirs Chintamanrao, which is very..mL-ch blue » T sketch ink page.37. Meanwhiig % the note' e% itsetf, the saiid:Gene!.9.8i*~ es? holder has submit'te'd~~..e deed::;a%;jep;;.se5:ae¢n dated 4* September 1976 setirgg that; on behaif of the legai" m~a:}";3.ee "a:i':;: have no objectien to recerd tide tenants to the suit lands as 48 (2) of the Land Reforms A Stated in the said representation mat, as regards the compensatb n and its requested may be passed- It is also .. Vepecéfically smted that, even though appiications are sent d to' bring me heirs of deceased land lord Sri. 'T Chintamanrao alias Bel b Madhavrao Patwerdhen IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE W.P.I~3o.4993i2006 IN THE HIGH COUR! OF K.A.R.NATg& AT BANGALORE W.P.N0.4993£'2006 13 on record and to issue notices to them, on 22"" May 1976, it appears from the notices sent by Lan<:!vVf1T:"fi_t:a_;nal that, the heirs are not finally brought on me said notices were still ' L. a deceased person oniy. 2 has requested the Land tfibuméi te' epriate? orders in the mattey; fepfesentaflon, the GPA hokier orders may be regarding 'and re eliotment in and TNCIKISRB687.
of the matter on behatf of meats GPA hoider has represented me ' ..... 3 I I. I I. 9 mat.
Vjfiiave no objection to register the occupancy ' fevour of tenants in respect of the land in .. , the principal ground urged by petitioners has substance nor the same can be taken into t consideration at this belated stage on me ground that, IN. THE ERGH CGLFRT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE W4P.Ne.s$993i20G6 IN THE H£GH CGURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE W.P.N0.4993'2906 1 4 they are not party to the proceedings and ng as such was issued to them. The petifionefe have categorically stated pf Chintamanrao, one Sn'. eopa':raaey$bée s.;oc:e property as his son died eff 315' October et f1:--Thefefefe;'v-wfiet emergm from the same ie nor their land in quesfion and me rightiy taken into by the Land Tribunal mueiee made by the GPA holder repreg--.e«+ting::ae eefifienem. Further, we Land Tribunal, :*infte'_.cons§eefatim sane of me receipts issued in Rudrappa Patil and Tamanna Wadagake am otiheeepplicants and the extent of the land held by ' e tenants in Sy.No.203 and other material ' "A'«V§eyeilable on file, has specificatfy referred met, all the five Wapplicants therein have equal share in 06 acrm namely IN THE- HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE W.P.No.»$993I'2006 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNA {AKA AT BANGALGRE W.P.No.4993f2006 15 zate Sri. Gurupad Tammanrta holds 115*" share with Ramu Tamanna Wadagaii and the retnainirtg hold 115'" share along with their ie' observed in the order paesedtvtfi applicants have stated that, have a respect of the suit land» the"
appttcants. The 'mmha: an these reievant material a\(a5t!et§5e'*§oing into ground reaiity, rights. Hence, I do noftfind as such committed by Land Triburtatin order nor petitioners '~made good grounds to interfere in the t petition, at this belated stage. Hence, the d * by petmo" hers is liable to be dismissed' ea of merits.
7. Yet anofiwer reason as to why fire writ petition ' filed by petitioners is iiable to be rejected at the threshoid itself is, on the ground of inordinate deiay in approaching / ____M_.__..
IN THE }{{GH COURT or: KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE W.P.No.«$993f2006 IN THE i-KGB COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE \V.P.No.4993¢'20G6 16 this Court in as much as the impugned order pissed is as far back as on 23"' June 1977 and petition is presented on 313* March nearly 29 years. The said satisfactorily explained The delay explaingd some to know cf the ordendnly when they received the.jnatice%'énd have coiiected fine writ petition, canndt'bé that, when the notice was;'is§s§1ed df original land owner, as per the..nandé' fc_§und* "facord of rights, as provided under _ Act and me public notice in Form also issued and published in the village mggdsand the matter is setfled in the year 197? itseh', * not in favour of one respondent, but totally in favour of ciaimants, it wduld have been the talk of the entire 'T village. Taking shelter under the guise that, petitioners 5' IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE W.I'.Na.&993i20D6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE W.P.N0.4993/20f.)6 17 came to know when they received the notice regarding compensation, is not justifiable. Thereforg.,...ikofijj'o:"'the above aspects, what reveals is that, even me passed by Land Tribunal in the;
not made sincere efforts to receive Knowing fully weil, have" cltosen to redress their gflevanee legal forum or at least before this!' 'th'e..'.'--reasonabie time. Therefore, theexpienetieniiefieieeibypétitieners at para.13 of the writ leuen credibility. Hence, the writ peirtioi?;i:;ieg;iii,§;y liable to be dismissed on groucci
- .. iailh ewe facts and circumstances of the
- ~ _ A etiove, the writ petition filed by petitioners I dismissed on with counts, viz. merits as BMV* viéell as on' delay and laches.
sd/-§__ Iudge IN THE HIGH, COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE W.?.No.4993f2006