Karnataka High Court
T M Sreedhara vs The Tahasildar Sagar Taluk Sagar on 17 June, 2008
Author: Mohan Shantanagoudar
Bench: Mohan Shantanagoudar
-1-
IN THE HIGH coum or KARNATAKA AT aamaagcae
DATED 11-as THE 17*" DAY OF ;
THE HON'BLE MRJUSTICE Mdi¥%A$iA--A'$¥§AN?4:§j~3'A;§di}£$:;§¥§._V'
max? PEETIO!§ No. 05 2005 g'§;sz-iii;/ksutz)
atwoen '
'I'.M. Sreedham A
S-/0 late Mahabalaiah
Aged about 50
Rfa'I'um.an' . « _ V
Post -- Tumafi --- V
Slziazzogaflisaiiict.' -» 1- ' ' ..Petitioner
(By Sri p.n.*»§s;awan%a'£t{, A§iy.,j
& §
" ._S-h_j1n6gé'_
VV _ 2. T153 As:'sistz§it1t Commissioner
Sagar. S7g1b- Division, Sagas:
' -- .. Shjmdga District.
. ;- V V'i'h=s'A Deputy Cemmissioner
gshi-mega Distrrict, Shimoga. ..Respondents
. V u Sri G. Chandrashekaxaiah, AGA.,)
- 2 -
This writ petiticn is filed under Articles 226 85 227 of the Constitution of India praying to set aside the impugned judgment dated 7-8-2006 passed by the Karnataka Appellate.-'--'_Ik*ibunaI, Bangalore in Revision Petition No.559/2005 (Annexure~--A} This writ petition eoming on for hearing thia"'déyV;.'__i}ie Court made the following : " » "
The petitioner made a repIiiseI1;'_t£it'Ei)I1iii'as"_1ier:i}§fine1ixre- 'G' dated 29.9.2003 before fliie'~--}_§ssietaIit Sub--Division., Sager, to confer attached to kumki lands. It seems; {Lg Aoepjzjbiitiiei representation was also given i'Ii'he'fehsildar by his endomement vide Aii"--n_nexe ' intimated the petitioner that the 2 ii be given mmerslxip of kumki or but the privileges if enjoyed by the » ipefjtiexier wiiliveonfinue under Section 79 (2) of the Karnataka iéeeéenueiiifiet However, the Assistant Caommissiazmer by "Viiie Anne:-mI\e--"K' dated 25.11.2004, observed that V "the 4_pe1i:iifioner is in possession of Soppina Betta lands adjoining property and that the petitizmer may be accorded ii " "permission to enjoy the privileges attached to Seppina Betta lands. Subsequently, the Deputy Commissianer in his V/' -3- endorsement dated 24.33005 vide with the order passed by the Assistanf ' ';'Ssvi:§.3Iie:.
However, he had added that ii) the pefitioner over Seppina II§. efi:rite 91'" 'A ' strangely, the Tahsildar V dented 18.4.2005 infimated Iflge tshet privileges of Soppina Betta lands the petitioner. The Oitlfif/€tI1£1O}:EfS£?%(£¥fiV1€.-Sit 18.4.2005 was questioneti Tribunai by the petitioi1erl'§o':'5S9/ 2005. The said Revision Peti£§it)n"e§tI:Iv.e:'v by the impugned cider dated 73* AuguetVV"2Q 06, Hence, this writ petition is order of the Tahsildar vide Annexure-'M' . thetijmer of the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal vide . .a.m........--e.x=.
The bare xeading of Section 79(2) of Karnataka Land 'Revenue Act makes it clear that the prxvl" '1eges that are being T enjoyed either by custom or under any order such as privileges in respect of kumki lands, Bane lands and Kane Iands in Smith V'
- 4 -
Kanara District, Betta lands and Hadi lands in North Kanara District, K311 and Soppina Betta iands in Mysore A112;->1, Jamma and Bane in Coorg District and motastha; §§n.ds in Hyderabad Area shaii continue. in tins' n:#:i:'t'f;:r,T dispute that the petitinner hasv-ibecn ¢enfioygfiig'V:hy <2ii.st6sn u Soppina Betta privileges. h im 5 number of trees and 34;:-1A:»..V'p1'I3__:;a so as' to enable. himself to enjoy t1;e----« izienéfits ajising of Soppina Betta lands. If it is s£:,' the"p:i#ii1c§§é:§;'_aftaghed ta Soppina Betta 1ancta%1s:uM«§§§::§: :5' i3eV.';;f1joyed by the petitioner. It is xelc§;an't in made in Mysore Revenue ManuéI..pi1b}i;éi1_e:ad._ bgzxflovenzment of Karnataka (Para-106). The séiwaae reads :
J "', -~ 106 : Soppinahetta also termed ' " v':'E's;§V_;2g§§ncf2byana in the Malnad is a land with a good V. gwwth set apart fies of assessment, . '.§3pé»cially for providing gmen manure mostly to- garden lands and also to Wet lands to some extent. These strips of land which are usually on a high ground, while serving as shade in the arena g8I'€i€i.'{1S formed in the lawer slopes and bottoms of valleys, supply leaf manure which is very essential )A/") -5- for supari garden cultivaiitm in Malruzzd. The proper preservation and maintenance of Soppina Betta is therefore stmngly urgfi.' A' garden ewners as it serves to maintain attnosphere and moist soil $0...essen:i:i"31' "te'.fa1e'ca_' gardens.
Though the extent of Sqppinafietfizto V' in respect of each acre 110'-i' been specifically 'fixed, tJ;i_e'-..e_5:3essIfiiei1t made in some places weri§$"..ou.'_L * to Hvaexes depending upon' VA of the Soppinabetimg -of: kaltieii land ' VV "
" . No -- VV on additional lands assigxed for ezf supari gardens raised on dry and Wef'3.éfi1ds need be levied.
_ :V"'Gem'ernment reserve full power to 'V"."_"-._Ie:f,ii.late from time to time the extent of ' ~. «fiends so assigned.
I With the permission of the district authorities, the owner (sf 5; new garden may take leaf manure 610., from Soppinabetta already assigned".
V"
-5-Fmm the aforementioned it is clear t.b.a't_; Sbppma Betta lands wifl serve as a shade to gae§ien_e formed in the lower slopes anti }ji:}Affbm3_ {inf :§"€1pfiIy leaf manure which is yvery cultivation in Mal11ad_ V maintenance vi' the fiiemf6;e very much Iiecessazty by '#0 maintain a humid admisphere 5 garden. In this matter, privileges attached ta Seppina denied. Acctardillgly, the foflowiflg oxderiis, "" ~ ' ' ' 'V '£'he ofdeie vigie Anne:-_:u1e--"A' passed by the Karnataka Tribunal, Bangalore, in Revision Petition A ._ 7"' August 2006, and the arder passed by the Sagar Taluk, vide Annexuxe-'M' dated. .. are smnd quashed. The petitioner shall be " to enjoy the privileges in respect of Soppina Betta Ianda which adjoins petitieanefs pmperty. However, it is made ('A/\ _ 7 -
clear that the title: deeds in respect of Soppina Sgttsgglgtnds cannot and shall not be issued in favour of the :_.v _ Writ petifion is disposed of V' --.1: _ . 3uCTC3"@1, _Wm