Back
1985 Supreme(Kar) 306
Karnataka High Court
Judges : Kulkarni
GAJANAN MAHADEV HEGDE - Appellant
Versus
RAMAKRISHNA JATTI NAIK - Respondent
C. R. Ps 3832 Of 1982
Decided On : 08/09/1985
The main legal point established in the judgment is the enforceability of a decree for permanent injunction and the implications of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act on the rights and privileges of tenants.
Headnote:
KARNATAKA LAND REFORMS ACT - TENANCY RIGHTS - SECTION 43, SECTION 44 - The court discussed the provisions of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, particularly Section 43 and Section 44, and their implications on the rights and privileges of tenants. The court emphasized that the Act confers additional rights on tenants and clarified the circumstances under which the Act would come into effect. The judgment highlighted the significance of a decree for permanent injunction and its enforceability under the Act.
Fact of the Case:
The decree-holders sought possession of lands from the tenants under the Bombay Tenancy Act, which was later confirmed by the High Court. The tenants then claimed occupancy rights under the Karnataka Land Reforms Act. The decree-holders filed execution petitions, which were resisted by the legal representatives of the deceased tenant and other defendants, citing their continued possession as tenants.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the tenants' claim of continued possession as tenants was unsubstantiated and amounted to wilful disobedience of the decree for permanent injunction. The court held that the executions were maintainable and the decree for permanent injunction remained enforceable.
Issues: The main issues revolved around the tenants' claim of continued possession as tenants and their entitlement to occupancy rights under the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, and the enforceability of the decree for permanent injunction.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the tenants' claim of continued possession as tenants was unsubstantiated and amounted to wilful disobedience of the decree for permanent injunction. The court also clarified the implications of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, particularly Section 43 and Section 44, on the rights and privileges of tenants.
Final Decision: The court set aside the lower court's order and allowed the execution petitions, directing them to be sent back for fresh disposal according to law.
( 1 ) CIVIL Revision Petition 3818 of 1982 by the decree-holders is directed against the order dated 19-10-1982 passed by the Munsiff, Honavar, in Execution Case No. 4 of 1981 dismissing the same.
( 2 ) CIVIL Revision Petition 3832 of 1982 by the decree-holders is directed against the very same common order dated 19-10-1982 passed by the Munsiff, Honavar, in Execution Case No. 40 of 1982 dismissing the same.
( 3 ) THE predecessors of the decree-holders were the owners and the landlords of Revision Survey nos. 200/1, 200/2, 200/3, 200/4, 201/1, 202/2, and were the mulgenidars of Survey Nos. 214/8a and 214/8b. The deceased judgment-debtor Jatti Naik, Respondent No. 6 Narayan and respondent No, 7 Devappa were the tenants in respect of the said eight lands.
( 4 ) AN application was filed by the predecessors of the present decree-holders against the erstwhile tenants namely deceased Jatti and Respondents 6 and 7 before the Tenancy Mamlatdar, honavar, under the provisions of the Bombay Tenancy Act, 1948 for possession on the ground that the said tenants had fallen in arrears of rent for more than Rs. 5,000/ -. The Tenancy mamlatdar-2 dismissed the Petition. The decree-holders preferred an appeal against the said order to the Prant Officer. The Prant Officer allowed the appeal and passed an order for possession in favour of the decree-holders and directed deceased Jatti and Respondents 6 and 7 to handover possession of the said eight lands to the decree-holders. Deceased Jatti and narayan-Respondent No. 6, being aggrieved by the said order, went in revision to the Bombay appellate Tribunal. The Bombay Appellate Tribunal confirmed the order passed by the Prant officer, by its order dated 30-6-1956. They approached the High Court of Bombay with a Writ petition challenging the order passed by the Tribunal. That Writ Petition was also dismissed by the High Court on 18-9-1956. In pursuance of the said order, the Tahsildar put the decree-holders in possession of all the eight lands on 19-9-1956 except a small portion where the hut of judgment-debtors was situate.
( 5 ) THEREAFTER deceased Jatti and Respondents 6 and 7 again tried to interfere with the possession of the decree-holders, notwithstanding the fact the Tahsildar had put the decree-holders in possession of the property in pursuance of the tenancy order ultimately confirmed in the Writ petition decided by the Bombay High Court. Therefore, the decree-holders filed a suit in O. S. 245 of 1957 against Jatti and Respondents 6 and 7 for permanent injunction. That suit was decreed against all the three persons on 6-8-1958. Respondents 6 and 7 were defendants 2 and 3 in the said suit. They did not prefer any appeal against the decree passed by the Munsiff's Court. Therefore, the said decree for permanent injunction became final.
( 6 ) THEREAFTER, the decree-holders filed another suit O. S. 70 of 1962 against Jatti for possession of the area, where the hut was situate and the possession of which had not been given to them by the Tahsildar.
( 7 ) AS can be seen from written statement filed by defen-dant No. 1 Jatti in that suit, he admitted that the Tahsildar had delivered possession of all the eight lands to the decree-holders, as per the order passed in the tenancy case, except a bit of land where his house was situate. However, the said suit O. S. 70 of 1962 was also decreed for possession on 30-6-1970. By the said decree passed in O. S. 70 of 1962 defendant No. 1 Jatti was directed to remove the construction put up by him in that area and he was directed to deliver vacant possession of the space to the present decree-holders. The said hut, where defendant No. 1 Jatti was residing, is situate in Survey No. 214/8b.
( 8 ) IN the meanwhile, the Karnataka Land Reforms Act came into force on 1-3-1974. Deceased jatti and Respondents 6 and 7, who were defendants 1 to 3 in O. S. 245 of 1957 filed an application in Form No. 7 under Section 48a of the Land Reforms Act claimin
