Karnataka High Court
Smt Narasamma vs The Principal Secretary on 5 July, 2022
Author: N.S.Sanjay Gowda
Bench: N.S.Sanjay Gowda
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF JULY, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA
W.P.No.49243/2015 (KLR - RR/SUR)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. NARASAMMA,
W/O LATE MUNIVENKATAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
RESIDING AT BYADARAHALLI,
KUNDANA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK,
BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT - 562 110.
2. SRI. MUNIRAJA,
S/O LATE MUNIVENKATAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
RESIDING AT BYADARAHALLI,
KUNDANA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK,
BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT - 562 110.
... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI.MUDDARANGAPPA, ADV. FOR P1;
SRI.SPOORTHY HEGDE N., ADV., FOR P2)
AND:
1. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,
GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA,
M S BUILDING,
BANGALORE - 560 001.
2
2. THE COMMISSIONER,
SURVEY SETTLEMENT AND LAND RECORDS,
K R CIRCLE,
BANGALORE - 560 001.
3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS,
PODIUM BLOCK, 4TH FLOOR,
D C OFFICE,
BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT - 560 001.
4. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS,
(THEN TAHSILDAR, DEVANAHALLI TALUK),
DODDABALLAPURA,
BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT - 560 001.
5. SMT. BUJJAMMA G.,
W/O G. NARAYANA REDDY,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO.42,
KALIYAMMA TEMPLE ROAD,
T. DASARAHALLI,
BANGALORE - 560 057.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.C.N.MAHADESHWARAN, AGA FOR R1 TO R4;
R5 IS SERVED)
THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH
ANNEXURE - R DATED 16.9.2015 AND ANNEXURE - N
(SKETCH) DATED 30.6.2012 ISSUED BY R-2 & 4
RESPECTIVELY; ISSUE THE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF
MANDAMUS TO INCORPORATE THE RECORDS PREPARED
ON 23.7.1984 IN THE REVENUE RECORDS AND TO
UPDATE THE CORRECT ENTRY BY DISCONTINUING THE
ILLEGAL ENTRY FOR MAINTENANCE OF FINAL RECORDS
OF RIGHT AT VILLAGE LEVEL.
3
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
ORDER
1. The undisputed facts of the case are as follows:
2. On 07.08.1956, 6 acres of land in Sy.No.18 was granted to Sri.Chikkamuniyappa.
3. In the year 1963, Sri.Chikkamuniyappa sold this 6 acres of land to one Sri.Ramachandra and Sri.Ramachandra, in turn, re-conveyed the property in the year 1968 to Sri.Chikkamuniyappa.
4. On 03.01.1979, Sri.Chikkamuniyappa conveyed 3 acres, out of 6 acres that had been granted to him, to one Sri.Honnaiah, under a registered sale deed dated 03.01.1979.
5. The sale deed executed in favour of Sri.Honnaiah is produced as Annexure-E indicates that Sri.Chikkamuniyappa had sold 3 acres on the Southern portion of 6 acres held by him in Sy.No.18. 4
6. On 23.08.1979 Sri.Honnaiah, conveyed 3 acres that he had purchased in favour of one Sri.Dandoji Rao.
7. Thereafter, on 15.12.1982, Sri.Dandoji Rao conveyed this 3 acres that he had purchased in favour of one Smt.Nagamma.
8. After the land was purchased by Smt.Nagamma, a Phodi was conducted on 23.07.1984. Under the said Phodi, the land purchased by Smt.Nagamma was assigned Sy.No.221/2 and the land retained by the grantee was assigned Sy.No.221/1.
9. In this phodi, in respect of both Survey Nos.221/1 and 221/2, a Kharab land of 29 guntas each was assigned to both Sy.Nos.221/1 and 221/2. In other words, the Kharab land that was available in both these sub divided survey numbers was divided equally i.e., 29 guntas of Kharab was assigned to the grantee's land bearing Sy.No.221/1 and also to Smt.Nagamma's portion bearing 5 Sy.No.221/2. This assignment made in the year 1984 was not challenged by either the grantee or Smt.Nagamma.
10. It appears that thereafter Smt.Nagamma intended to sell the property to Sri.Sattar Khan and Sri.Mehboob Khan and in this regard, a fresh Phodi appears to have been conducted. In this Phodi, the land which had been assigned as Sy.No.221/1 in favour of the original grantee was mentioned as 2 acres 02 guntas and only a Kharab of 20 guntas was attached to this extent. This resulted in leaving only an extent of 1 acre 22 guntas of Hiduvali land in favour of the original grantee, while in respect of the land that had been sold, ie., Sy No.221/2, an extent of 3 acres 38 guntas was assigned, out of which 38 guntas was Kharab.
11. In other words, by this Phodi of the year 2012, the Kharab which had been assigned in favour of the grantee and the purchaser equally at 29 guntas each, was changed to 20 guntas and 38 guntas in favour of the grantee and the purchaser respectively. The effect of this Phodi was 6 that the land sold by the grantee was enlarged from 3 acres to 3 acres 38 guntas, 38 guntas being Kharab.
12. This Phodi proceedings conducted at the behest of Smt.Nagamma in the year 2012 became the subject matter of a suo motu appeal before the Deputy Director of Land Records (for short 'DDLR') and the DDLR, by an order dated 13.03.2015 allowed the appeal and held that the Phodi conducted of the year 2012, by which, the Kharab was increased from 29 guntas to 38 guntas in favour of Sy.No.221/2 and was decreased from 29 gutnas to 20 guntas in Sy.No.221/1 was incorrect and he accordingly, restored the Phodi of the year 1984 and thus restored the equal assignment of 29 guntas to both Sy.Nos.221/1 and 221/2.
13. Being aggrieved by this order, a revision was preferred before the Commissioner and the Commissioner by the impugned order has set-aside the order of the Assistant Director of Land Records (for short 'ADLR') and 7 confirmed the Phodi of the year 2012. It is this order of the Commissioner, which is impugned in this writ petition.
14. As stated above, the total extent of land granted to Sri.Chikkamuniyappa was 6 acres. As could be seen from the comparison sketch prepared by the ADLR, which is produced as Annexure-P, the original Sy.No.18 contains two Hallas running through the entire survey number at two different places in the shape of a 'V'. The sketch indicates that the Halla runs through both the portions in the entire land in equal proportions. It is for this reason that when the Phodi was conducted, the Kharab was distributed equally at 29 guntas between the two sub divisions 221/1 and 221/2.
15. However, when a fresh Phodi was conducted in the year 2012, this assignment of Kharab was changed and the Kharab which had been distributed equally at 29 gutnas to both the Block Nos.1 and 2 was changed to 20 guntas and 38 guntas. If the Halla runs through the entire land in equal proportions, the increase of Kharab in 8 respect of one Block and decreasing it in respect of another Block would not be correct. The ADLR therefore, proceeded to set right this anomaly and ensured that the Phodi that had been conducted in the year 1984, in which the Kharab was divided equally at 29 guntas, should stand restored.
16. The Commissioner, however, in the impugned order, has without considering the fact that the Phodi had been done in the year 1984, in which the Kharab was divided equally, has proceeded on to an erroneous assumption that the entire Kharab was to be attached only to the land of the grantee and that the grantee had only 1 acre 22 guntas available.
17. A perusal of the sketch indicates that the Halla runs right across the entire land in two places and the sketch also indicates that the Kharab goes in equal proportions in both the Blocks and that was reason that when a Phodi was conducted in the year 1984, Kharab of 29 gutnas was assigned to both the Block Nos.1 and 2. The Commissioner 9 has however, in the impugned order, chosen to ignore this particular fact and has come to the erroneous conclusion that the entire Kharab was to be attached only to the grantee and has thereby, reduced their hiduvali holding.
18. This order cannot be therefore, be sustained and the same is accordingly quashed. The matter shall stand remitted to the Commissioner with a direction to the Commissioner to re-consider the entire matter and pass fresh orders. The Commissioner shall take note of the fact that the Halla appears to be running through the entire land in equal proportion as indicated in the comparison sketch prepared by the ADLR (Annexure-P). The Commissioner shall also ascertain an exact extent, location of Kharab in the entire land and thereafter assign the portion of Kharab appropriately to both the Blocks. 10
19. The writ petition is accordingly allowed.
Sd/-
JUDGE GH