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

1999 Supreme(Kar) 308

T.N.VALLINAYAGAM
K. JAYAMMA – Appellant
Versus
TAHSILDAR, ANEKAL TALUK, ANEKAL – Respondent


( 1 ) IN these batch of writ petitions, the prayer made by the petitioners is to direct the respondent 1-Tahsildar, Anekal Taluk, to enter the names of petitioners in the mutation register and record of rights in respect of schedule mentioned lands.

( 2 ) THE case of the petitioners are that they are residents of Jayanagar, Bangalore-11 and they are entitled to purchase agricultural lands under the provisions of Karnataka Land Reforms Act and there is no bar against them for purchasing agricultural land. The petitioners under various registered sale deeds registered on different dates which are detailed in the petition have purchased and on the basis of sale deeds they applied to first respondent to enter their names within the meaning of Sections 128 (4) and 129 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 and the officer declined to enter their names. Therefore, the writ petitions are filed.

( 3 ) IT is contended by the learned Advocate Mr. Achar that without going into the validity of the sale deeds, once intimation of registration of sale is sent to the first respondent, it is their primary duty to enter the name in the register and they cannot avoid to perform the duty which is i











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