Result: Writ Petition dismissed.

N.K. Patil, J.

These petitioners claiming to be the legal representatives of the deceased Smt. Parameshwariamma w/o Subbaraya Bhat, questioning the correctness of the impugned order dated 29th August 1979 passed by the first respondent-Land Tribunal, Sullia in proceedings No. LRY:2639:74-75 granting the occupancy right in favour of 3rd respondent in respect of the land in question, have presented this writ petition.

2. The third respondent claiming to be the tenant in respect of the lands in quesion had filed Form No. VII for registration of occupancy rights before the first respondent- Land Tribunal-Sullia. The first respondent-Land Tribunal, Sullia, after conducting enquiry and after following the due procedures as envisaged under the relevant provisions of the Land Reforms Act, and in the light of the oral and documentary evidene available on file, has registered the occupancy rights in favour of third respondent holding that, the request of the land owner for an adjournment has been considered and matter was adjourned and thereafter, the land owner was not present and therefore, on the basis of the materials available on record, it has passed the impugned order. Being aggrieved by the impugned order passed by the first respondent- Land Tribunal, Sullia, petitioners herein felt necessitated to present this writ petition.

3. The principal submission canvassed by the learned Counsel appearing for petitioners-Sri K. Srihari is that, petitioners are entitled for their share in the joint family property and they have not been notified before registering the occupancy rights in favour of tenant and therefore, the order impugned is bad in law and it is not sustainable. Therefore, learned Counsel appearing for petitioners has prayed to allow the instant writ petition.

4. Per contra, learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents-1 and 2 and learned Counsel appearing for third respondent, at the out set substantiated the order passed by the first respondent-Land Tribunal, Sullia and submitted that, no error or illegality as such has been committed by the first respondent-Land Tribunal in passing the said order and interference by this Court at this distance of time is not justifiable and the third respondent is in settled possession and enjoying the said lands from the time immemorial. Therefore, they submitted that, the writ petition filed by petitioners is liable to be dismissed as devoid of merits.

5. I have heard learned Counsel appearing for petitioners, learned Govenment Pleader appearing for respondents-1 and 2 and learned Counsel appearing for third respondent. Other respondents served and unrepresented.

6. After critical evaluation of the original records made available by the learned Governmetn Pleader appearing for respondents-1 and 2, including the order passed by the first respondent- Land Tribunal, Sullia and other materials available on file at threadbare, what it emerges is that, the third respondent herein had filed Form No. VII for grant of occupancy rights on 30.12.1974. The said application filed by third respondent had come up for consideration before the first respondent- Land Tribunal, Sullia. The first respondent- Land Tribunal, Sullia, has registered the same in proceeding No. LRY:2639:74-75. The first respondent-Land Tribunal, Sullia, has issued notice under Section 48(A)(2) and 19.8.1977 and the same was published in the panchayath office and it has also issued the individual notices to the interested parties. In pursuance of receipt of the notice, the mother of the petitioners late Smt. Parameswariamma who was the respondent in the proceedings before the Land Tribunal, Sullia, has pryaed for an adjournment on 7.11.1977 on the ground that, due to severe leg pain, she was not in a position to attend the proceeding before the Land Tribunal and requested to grant time to enable her to recover from the pain and to attend the before the Tribunal and accordingly the matter was adjourned. Therefore o