SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2017 Supreme(SC) 1807

S.A.BOBDE, L.NAGESWARA RAO
Vivek M. Hinduja – Appellant
Versus
M. Ashwatha – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Ranjit Kumar, Sr. Adv. Mr. V. Giri, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rajesh Mahale, AOR Mr. Sharan Thakur, Adv. Mr. Amit A. Pai, Adv. Mr. Krutin Joshi, Adv. Mr. Rishiraj Sharma, Adv. Mr. Krishnan Venogopal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Amit Dhingra, Adv. Mr. Munawwar Naseem, Adv. Mr. Tejas S.R., Adv. Mr. Amadeep Bawa, Adv. Mr. Suryveer Beri, Adv. for M/S. Dua Associates, AOR
For the Respondent: Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AOR Mr. Parikshit P Angadi, Adv. Md. Apzal Ansari, Adv. Mr. Irshad Ahmad, AOR Mr. Guntur Prabhakar, AOR Mr. P.N. Misra, Sr. Adv. Mr. E.C. Vidya Sagar, AOR Mr. Subhash Chandra Sagar, Adv. Mr. Jennifer John, Adv. Mr. Nagmohan Das, Sr. Adv. Mr. Anand Sanjay M. Nuli, Adv. Mr. Dharam Singh, Adv. Mr. Surajm Adv. for M/S. Nuli & Nuli, AOR Mr. R. D. Upadhyay, AOR Ms. Jennfer John, Adv. Mr. L.R. Singh, Adv. Mr. Sunil Fernandes, AOR Ms. Astha Sharma, Adv. Mr. Anju Thomas, Adv.

ORDER :

1. These three appeals arise out of a common judgment of the Karnataka High Court, in which the appellants before us were held to be disentitled to the granted land purchased by them. The High Court in its judgment upheld the order of the single judge in view of the social welfare legislation, Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 (for short, "the Karnataka Act"), and on the ground that the original grantee of the lands was a member of the Scheduled Caste community, restored the lands back to the legal representatives of the original grantee.

2. The chronology of the events in the three appeals before us is different. The area of the lands and the original grantees are also different. The number of times the lands changed hands is also different. But a common feature of all these cases, which enable us to deal with them at the same time is the fact that after the Karnataka Act came into force on 01.01.1979, the competent authorities did not take any action till the year, 1998. It was then that they apparently took suo motu action and served notices on the appellants to show cause as to why the lands should not be

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top