Karnataka High Court
Mysore Taluk Co-Operative vs Sri H S Ramesh on 28 November, 2023
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:43117
WP No.3940 of 2018
C/W
WP NOS. 52532 of 2018 and 55487 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
WRIT PETITION NO.3940 OF 2018 (KLR-RES)
C/W
WRIT PETITION NOS.52532 OF 2018 AND
55487 OF 2018
IN WP NO.3940 OF 2018
BETWEEN
SHRI H.S. RAMESH
S/O LATE H.S. SRINIVASA RAO
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS
R/AT NO.82, GOLLAGERI
CHAMARAJA MOHALLA
MYSURU-570 024.
...PETITIONER
Digitally signed by
(BY SRI. G.A. SRIKANTE GOWDA, ADVOCATE)
ARUN KUMAR M S
Location: High
Court of Karnataka
AND
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF LAND REVENUE,
VIKASA SOUDHA,
BENGALURU-560 001.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
MYSURU DISTRICT,
MYSURU-570 024.
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:43117
WP No.3940 of 2018
C/W
WP NOS. 52532 of 2018 and 55487 of 2018
3. THE TAHSILDAR
MYSURU TALUK,
MYSURU-570 024.
4. MYSORE TALUK CO-OPERATIVE
INDUSTRIAL ESTATE LTD
MEDAR SANGHA BUILDING,
2ND CROSS, PARVATHI ROAD,
MYSURU-570 024.
5. KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS
DEVELOPMENT BOARD
REPRESENTED BY DEVELOPMENT OFFICER
MYSURU TALUK
MYSURU-570 024.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MOHAMMED JAFFAR SHAH, AGA FOR R1 TO R3;
SRI. G.B. SHARATHGOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R4;
SRI. P.V. CHANDRASHEKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R5)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
QUASH THE LETTER/ORDER DATED 25.01.2017 PASSED BY
THE TAHSILDAR, MYSURU TALUK, MYSURU IN CASE
NO.LND.CR.130/2016-17 (ANNEXURE-U) WITH RESPECT TO
LAND SY.NO.80, MEASURING 5 ACRES 9 GUNTAS, SITUATED
AT HEBBAL VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, MYSURU TALUK, MYSURU
DISTRICT AND QUASH THE ORDER DATED 20.06.2018
(ANNEXURE-X) PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA APPELLATE
-3-
NC: 2023:KHC:43117
WP No.3940 of 2018
C/W
WP NOS. 52532 of 2018 and 55487 of 2018
TRIBUNAL AT BENGALURU IN (REVENUE) APPEAL NO.860/2015
AND ETC.
IN WP NO.52532 OF 2018
BETWEEN:
SHRI. H. S. RAMESH
S/O. LATE SHRI. H. S. SRINIVASA RAO,
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO.82,
GOLLAGERI,
CHAMARAJA MOHALLA,
MYSURU-570 024.
REPRESENTED BY HIS GPA HOLDER:
SHRI. NAGENDRA KUMAR,
S/O. LATE SHRI. RANGAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
RESIDING AT GOLLAGERI,
CHAMARAJA MOHALLA,
MYSURU-570 024.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. G.A. SRIKANTE GOWDA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF LAND REVENUE,
VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
MYSURU DISTRICT,
MYSURU-570 024.
-4-
NC: 2023:KHC:43117
WP No.3940 of 2018
C/W
WP NOS. 52532 of 2018 and 55487 of 2018
3. THE TAHSILDAR
MYSURU TALUK, MYSURU-570 024.
4. MYSORE TALUK CO-OPERATIVE
INDUSTRIAL ESTATE LIMITED
MEDAR SANGHA BUILDING,
2ND CROSS, PARVATHI ROAD,
MYSURU-570 024.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MOHAMMED JAFFAR SHAH, AGA FOR R1 TO R3;
SRI. G.B. SHARATH GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R4)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
QUASH THE ORDER DATED 03.10.2018 PASSED BY THE
KARNATAKA APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN (REVENUE) APPEAL
NO.860/2015 IN AN INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION FILED
UNDER SECTION 151 OF CPC R/W REGULATION 13 OF
KARNATAKA APPELLATE TRIBUNAL REGULATIONS (AS
ANNEXURE-V) AND ETC.
IN WP NO.55487 OF 2018
BETWEEN
MYSORE TALUK CO-OPERATIVE
INDUSTRIAL ESTATE LTD.
MEDAR SANGHA BUILDING
-5-
NC: 2023:KHC:43117
WP No.3940 of 2018
C/W
WP NOS. 52532 of 2018 and 55487 of 2018
2ND CROSS, PARVATHI BUILDING
MYSURU-570 001.
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
SMT. K.B. MANGALA
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SHARATH GOWDA, G.B., ADVOCATE)
AND
1. SRI. H.S. RAMESH
S/O LATE H.S. SRINIVASA RAO
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS
R/AT NO.82, GOLLAGERI
CHAMARAJA MOHALLA
MYSURU-570 024.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
MYSURU DISTRICT
MYSURU-570 001.
3. THE TAHASILDAR
MYSURU TALUK
MYSURU-570 024.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. G.A. SRIKANTE GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI. MOHAMMED JAFFAR SHAH, AGA FOR R2 & R3)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET
ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 03.11.2017 PASSED ON I.A.NO.5
-6-
NC: 2023:KHC:43117
WP No.3940 of 2018
C/W
WP NOS. 52532 of 2018 and 55487 of 2018
(REVENUE)APPEAL NO.860/2015 (CH-2 PRE) ON THE FILE OF
THE KARNATAKA APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU
PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.
THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
In Writ Petition No.3940/2018:
1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.
2. In this writ petition, petitioner is assailing order dated 25.01.2017 passed by respondent No.3 (Annexure-
U) in respect of the land bearing Sy. No.80 measuring 5 acres 9 guntas situate at Hebbal Village, Kasaba Hobli, Mysuru Taluk and District and also order dated 20.06.2018 (Annexure-X) passed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal at Bengaluru (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'), in (Revenue)Appeal No.860/2015, inter alia sought for -7- NC: 2023:KHC:43117 WP No.3940 of 2018 C/W WP NOS. 52532 of 2018 and 55487 of 2018 direction to the respondents not to alter / change nature of the land in question.
3. Sri. G.A. Srikante Gowda, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, firstly contended that, the impugned order passed by respondent No.3 dated 25.01.2017 (Annexure-U) during the pendency of the appeal before the Tribunal is not correct and third respondent has no jurisdiction to pass such an order which would affect the rights of the petitioner in so far as grant of land made in favour of the father of the petitioner is concerned, accordingly, sought for interference of this Court. He also emphasised on the application in I.A.1/2023 seeking to initiate proceedings against respondent Nos.4 and 5 following the order dated 10.07.2018 in W.P. No.3940/2018. He further contended that despite the order passed by this Court to maintain status-quo and not to alter the nature of the land in question, however, the respondent No.5 - Board has executed registered sale deed in respect of the respondent No.4 as per the -8- NC: 2023:KHC:43117 WP No.3940 of 2018 C/W WP NOS. 52532 of 2018 and 55487 of 2018 registered sale deed dated 26.05.2023 and accordingly, he submitted that it is a clear violation of the order passed by this Court and contemptuous act on the part of the respondent has to be taken seriously and accordingly, he submitted that even under Article 215 of the Constitution of India, in writ proceedings, this Court is empowered to take action against the respondents.
4. Per contra, Sri. G.B. Sharath Gowda, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.4, denied the allegation made by the petitioner herein that construction has been made in violation of the interim order granted by this Court. He also contended that the subject matter of the grant made in favour of the father of the petitioner is pending consideration before the Tribunal in Appeal No.860/2015 and unless the Tribunal determines the rights of the parties relating to the property in question and in the event if the petitioner succeeds in appeal, then only respondent No.4 will have to handover property in favour of the petitioner and in the event if petitioner does -9- NC: 2023:KHC:43117 WP No.3940 of 2018 C/W WP NOS. 52532 of 2018 and 55487 of 2018 not succeed, petitioner will not have any right over the property in question.
5. Sri. P.V. Chandrashekar, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.5 - Board sought to justify the action on the part of the respondent - authorities.
6. In the light of the submissions made by learned counsel appearing for the parties, what is sought to be challenged by the petitioner herein is with regard to the order dated 25.01.2017 (Annexure-U) passed by respondent No.3. Careful examination of Annexure-U would indicate that the alleged allotment made in favour of the petitioner is circumscribed with the case before the Tribunal which is pending consideration. In that view of the matter, no interference is called for at this juncture as the entire matter is subjudiced before the Tribunal as the subject land is claimed to have been allotted in favour of the father of the petitioner.
- 10 -
NC: 2023:KHC:43117 WP No.3940 of 2018 C/W WP NOS. 52532 of 2018 and 55487 of 2018
7. It is also pertinent to mention that, so far as violation of the interim order is concerned, it is true that this Court has power under Article 215 of the Constitution of India being Court of record, however, the petitioner ought to have filed a petition under the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 against the alleged contemnor and in such an event, the appropriate proceedings ought to have been initiated against the respondent. Though the said feeble ground is urged by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, however, looking into the submissions as contended by the learned counsel for respondent No.5 that respondent No.4 has allotted the plots in favour of members of respondent No.4 and construction is also being made in the said plots since 2011 and therefore, he sought to deny the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.
8. Nevertheless, as the matter is pending consideration before the Tribunal, in the event if the petitioner succeeds in the appeal before the Tribunal and as the Tribunal is
- 11 -
NC: 2023:KHC:43117 WP No.3940 of 2018 C/W WP NOS. 52532 of 2018 and 55487 of 2018 required to determine the rights of the parties including the question relating to grant made in favour of the father of the petitioner is concerned, I am of the view that, no interference could be made in so far as the present Writ Petition is concerned. The Tribunal shall expedite the hearing in (Revenue)Appeal No.860/2015, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, taking into account the factual aspects on record, on merits.
Needless to say that all the contentions of the parties are kept open.
9. Accordingly, W.P. No.3940/2018 stands disposed of with the above observations.
In Writ Petition No. 52532/2018:
10. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.
11. In this writ petition, petitioner is assailing the order dated 03.10.2018 passed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal at Bengaluru (hereinafter referred to as 'the
- 12 -
NC: 2023:KHC:43117 WP No.3940 of 2018 C/W WP NOS. 52532 of 2018 and 55487 of 2018 Tribunal'), in (Revenue)Appeal No.860/2015, rejecting the interlocutory application filed under Section 151 OF CPC read with Regulation 13 of the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal Regulations, as per Annexure-V to the Writ Petition.
12. In view of the aforementioned order passed in W.P. 3940/2018, wherein the Tribunal has been directed to expedite the matter and dispose of the (Revenue)Appeal No.860/2015 at the earliest, no interference is called for, by this Court, in this Writ Petition.
13. W.P. No. 52532/2018 stands disposed of accordingly.
In W.P. No.55487/2018:
14. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.
15. In this writ petition, the petitioner - Mysore Taluk Co- operative Industrial Estate Limited is challenging the order
- 13 -
NC: 2023:KHC:43117 WP No.3940 of 2018 C/W WP NOS. 52532 of 2018 and 55487 of 2018 dated 03.11.2017 passed on I.A.5 in Appeal No.860/2015 on the file of Tribunal (Annexure-A).
16. The factual aspects on record would indicate that respondent No.5 - Board has made allotment in terms of the letter bearing No.KIADB/MYS/11/31/3293/2002-03 produced at Annexure-C to the writ petition. In that view of the matter, petitioner in the said writ petition being a beneficiary of the land in question, ought to have been heard in the matter to adjudicate the matter on merits and accordingly, the impugned order is liable to be set aside.
17. Accordingly, the W.P. No. 55487/2018 is allowed and order dated 03.11.2017 passed on I.A.5 in Appeal No.860/2015 on the file of the Tribunal is hereby set aside. The application I.A.5 filed by the petitioner herein in Appeal No.860/2015 stands allowed. The Tribunal is directed to hear the petitioner along with the respondents and dispose of the (Revenue) Appeal No.860/2015 at the earliest.
- 14 -
NC: 2023:KHC:43117 WP No.3940 of 2018 C/W WP NOS. 52532 of 2018 and 55487 of 2018 It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter.
All the contentions of the parties are kept open.
SD/-
JUDGE sac*