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

2007 Supreme(Kar) 21

K.SREEDHAR RAO
NEVY DSOUZA – Appellant
Versus
KARNATAKA APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE – Respondent


Advocates:
Sri B.L. Patil,Sri Nadiga Shivanandappa

ORDER

The petitioner 1 was granted occupancy rights in respect of Sy. Nos. 101/2 and 101/3 of Kukkala Village, Belthangadi Taluk. The first petitioner sold 20 cents of land to 2nd petitioner and another 20 cents of land to the third petitioner in the year 1992. The Assistant Commissioner issued notice that the sale of agricultural land in favour of the 2nd and 3rd respondents is bad in law. Hence, directed resumption of the land, as it is sold in contravention of the terms of Form 10.

2. Petitioners 2 and 3 submit that after purchase they made an application for conversion of non-agricultural purpose and it has been granted. The petitioners have put up residential house after obtaining necessary sanction from the local authority and revenue authorities. The provisions of Section 61 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 are amended. 15 years block period is to be now computed from the date of the order of the Tribunal and not the grant of Form 10. In the instant case, if the period is reckoned from the date of the order, the purchase is made beyond 15 years.

3. The Government Advocate submits that the amendment to Section 61 was effected in the year 1999. The purchase is made in t


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