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

1997 Supreme(Kar) 709

Karnataka High Court
JYOTHINAGARAM CHIKKAVENKATASWAMAIAH - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA - Respondent
Decided On : 12-17-97
W.P. : 21947 of 1986

Advocates:
B.E.KOTIAN, H.K.Vasudeva Reddy, RAVI VERMA

Headnote:Mysore Land Revenue Code, 1888-Section 135, Mysore Land Revenue Rules, 1938, Rule 47, Karnataka SC & STC (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978-Sections 4 and 5-rule prohibits grantee from alienation of land granted free of price for all time-but in case nothing about prohibition has been mentioned, rule of prohibition applicable as laid down in rule shall be applied-instantly, sale made in contravention of the rule held void.

H. N. TILHARI, J.

( 1 ) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner Sri vasudeva reddy for the petitioner as well as Sri ravivarma kumar for respondent 4 and Sri b. e. kotian, learned government Advocate for respondents 1 to 3.

( 2 ) BY this petition the petitioner has sought the following reliefs: a. Order declaring Rule 47 of the Mysore land revenue rules made under the land revenue code, 1888, which was in force in erstwhile State of Mysore as unconstitutional and void; b. For issuance of writ of mandamus or certiorari quashing the order dated 20-11-1986, Annexure-K passed by the special deputy commissioner, kolar, in case No. Ra. sc. st. 108 of 1985-86, as well as sought the quashing of the order dated 14-10-1985 passed by the assistant commissioner, chikkaballapur sub-division, chikkaballapur in case No. Lnd. Sc. St. (cmn) 570 of 1979-80 and for issuance of further writ or order this court deems fit. The order dated 20-11-1986 is the order passed by the special deputy commissioner, as an appellate court affirming the order dated 14-10-1985, passed by the assistant commissioner, whereby the assistant commissioner has declared that the sale of 4 guntas of land of sy. No. 8 had been void and stood forfeited to the government and it further ordered the eviction of the petitioner from the said land and for its resumption and recall in favour of respondent 4, a. Narayanaswamy to the writ petition.

( 3 ) IT is admitted by the petitioner that the land bearing sy. Nos. 7 and 8 of sonnasetti village, chintamani taluk, district kolar belong to the government-state. As per petitioner's case vide endorsement dated 31-8-1951, issued to respondent 4, it was revealed that in reply to the petition dated 30-11-1950, appealing against the order of revenue commissioner dated 31-8-1950, sanctioning alienation of 29 guntas of land of sy. No. 8 to Sri c. n. rukmoji rao mans for construction of the cinema theatre, it was informed and conveyed to them that it has been ordered that the grant of land for construction of cinema theatre will be limited to 17 guntas and that remaining 12 guntas will be available for grant to adikarnatakas for formation of the sites and that a. Narayanaswamy was allowed to occupy the area in which he had laid the foundation. It has further been averred that on a review petition being made, Sri rukmoji rao was informed, in modification of the previous government Order, as per endorsement dated 5-12-1952, it had been ordered that the grant of land made to Sri rukmoji rao was limited to 19 guntas and that 10 guntas will be available for building sites for harijans and respondent 4 may be permitted to occupy an area on which he laid foundation. The deputy commissioner, kolar has also issued a memo to the effect that 4 guntas of land of sy. No. 8 of sonnasettihalli village on which narayanaswamy had laid foundation has been confirmed and granted to narayanaswamy and he was permitted to remain in occupation and possession of 4 guntas of land of sy. No. 8. That subsequently Sri narayanaswamy, vide registered sale deeds dated 24-12-1955, 10-2-1958, 24-5-1959 and 18-10-1966 transferred by sale the entire 4 guntas of land, granted to Sri narayanaswamy. These transfer deeds were executed by narayanaswamy in favour of the petitioner and the petitioner had constructed 20 shops in the land. The assistant commissioner, chikkaballapur sub-division, chikkaballapur vide order dated 24-9-1970, held that the sale of the sites in favour of the petitioner or are in favour of the members of the petitioner's family are contrary to the Mysore land revenue rules as amended upto 1956 and came to the conclusion that the transfers were in violation of the rules and he also found that the petitioner sold another 2 guntas of land of sy. No. 8 granted to harijans, but finally he ordered that the entire 6 guntas of land be granted to the petitioner at the upset price of Rs. 20/- per square yard. The petitioner was also directed to pay a conversion fine of



















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

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 Back to top