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

1990 Supreme(Kar) 594

M.RAMA JOIS, M.M.MIRDHE
SIDDAMMA – Appellant
Versus
CHIKKEGOWDA – Respondent


Advocates:
N.DEVDAS, S.N.KESHAVA MURTHY, T.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO

RAMA JOIS, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal is presented by the appellant against the order dated 26-6-1989 of the learned judge allowing the writ petition presented by respondent No. 1 and setting aside the order of the deputy commissioner, mandya district, mandya (rcspondcnt-2 herein) dismissing his appeal and confirming the order of the assistant commissioner, mandya sub-division, mandya (respondent-3 herein) in which it was held that the sale of the land in question in favour of respondent No. 1 was void in view of the Provisions of the karnalaka scheduled castes and scheduled tribes (prohibition of transfer of certain lands) Act, 1978 ('the act' for short ).

( 2 ) THE brief facts of the case arc these.- 2 acres of land in survey No. 98 of hullegala village, malavalli taluk, mandya district, had been given for cultivation under grow more food scheme which had been promulgated by the then government of his highness the maharaja of Mysore in the year 1944. According to the grow more food scheme if the person to whom the land was given on temporary lease under the said scheme cultivated the land, after the of five years the land was required to be grated to the same person. In the present cas











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