The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the categories of persons entitled to maintain an appeal under Section 28 of the Inams Abolition Act.

H. RANGAVITTALACHAR, J.

( 1 ) THE writ petition is filed challenging the correctness of the order of the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal holding that the appeal filed by respondents 4 to 8 before it, is maintainable. Facts are as under:

( 2 ) LANDS bearing Sy. Nos. 130, 131, 134, 135 and 136 of "khayamgutta Binnamangala Village" are mam lands. After the coming into force of the Karnataka Personal and Miscellaneous Inams Abolition act, 1954 petitioners herein filed applications for registration of occupancy rights in respect of the lands under their cultivation before the Special Deputy Commissioner for Inams Abolition (Hereinafter referred to as the Deputy Commissioner ). While their applications were being enquired into by the Deputy Commissioner, respondents 4 to 8 herein filed an application under Order 1, Rule 10 (2) of Code of Civil procedure for getting impleaded on the ground that they are also interested persons being the purchasers of certain house sites situated in the lands. This application came to be rejected by the Deputy commissioner. Subsequently by a final order dated 12-7-1999, the deputy Commissioner allowed the applications of the petitioners and ordered them to be registered as occupants.

( 3 ) THE final order of the Deputy Commissioner came to be challenged by respondents 4 to 8 herein belatedly before the Karnataka Appellate tribunal (KAT ). They made 3 applications before the Tribunal. (I) I. A. No. I was tiled under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay in preferring the appeal. (ii) I. A. No. II was filed for staying the operation of the order of the Special Deputy Commissioner. (iii) LA. No. III was filed for seeking leave of the Tribunal to prosecute the appeal. The Tribunal allowed all the 3 applications, while allowing LA. No, III it has held that "respondents 4 to 8 though were not parties before the special Deputy Commissioner since they are the purchasers of certain house sites in the lands bearing Sy. Nos. 130, 131 and 134, they have interest in the properties in question". Hence, their appeal is maintainable.

( 4 ) THIS order is under challenge in this writ petition. Assailing this reason of the Tribunal as erroneous, Sri Gangi Reddy, learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that under the scheme of the Inams abolition Act, only an inamdar or a person claiming occupancy rights alone are entitled to file an appeal under Section 28 of the Act. But, strangers like respondents 4 to 8 have no right of appeal. Tribunal therefore was not right in entertaining theiri appeal.

( 5 ) PER contra, Sri Sudarshana Reddy, learned Counsel appearing for respondents 4 to 8 defended the order by stating that a person even though is not a party before the Deputy Commissioner in an enquiry under Section 10 of the Act but if his interests are affected by the order, is entitled to maintain an appeal.

( 6 ) IN order to appreciate the rival contentions, it is necessary to briefly refer to the provisions of the Karnataka (Personal and miscellaneous) Inams Abolition Act, 1954 and to state the persons entitled to maintain an appeal under Section 28 of the Act.

( 7 ) THE Mysore (Personal and Miscellaneous) Inams Abolition Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for brevity) was passed with the intention of abolishing all the inams. Section 3 of the Act provides that the consequences of vesting among other things being that all rights of inamdar Stands abolished and the entire inam vests in the State of mysore absolutely free from all encumbrances. However, the "act" confers rights in favour of certain categories of tenants, cultivating the lands, under the Inamdar under Sections 4, 5 and 6; On holders of minor inam under Sections 7 and 8 and on the Inamdar under Section 9. Apart from the inarndar and the tenants, under Section 12 every owner of a private building is entitled to keep the building; and under Section 13 of the Act a third party is entitled to keep the converted lands, provided the c

Click Here to Read the rest of this document