K. Ramanna, J.

Unsuccessful Inamdar of land has come up with this writ appeal, under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961, to set aside the order dated 26-07-2004 passed by the learned Single Judge of this court in W.P.No.22692/1998 and to restore the order of Land Tribunal dated 19-5-1998.

2. The brief facts of the case are that husband of third respondent i.e., late Chotusab filed form No. 7 before the Land Tribunal in the year 1976 claiming occupancy rights in respect of land bearing Sy.No.64 to an extent of 1.32 guntas of Kowdenahalli village on the basis of lease deed i.e. Guttige Kararu is said to have been executed in the year 1957 in favour of one K.G. Venkoba Rao, father of appellant herein, in respect of land in question along with two other lands i.e., Sy.Nos.65 measuring 5.3 guntas and 125/3 measuring 0.9 guntas of Kowdenahalli village, Bangalore South Taluk. The land Tribunal conducted the enquiry and by order dated 20-4-1979 rejected the claim of Chotusab. The applicant-Chotusab died on 7-2-1979 leaving behind his L.R.- third respondent herein. Therefore, third respondent being the L.R, filed W.P.No.3529/1980, before this Court questioning the legality of the order of rejection of tenancy claim made by land Tribunal. This Court had allowed the said petition and remanded the matter to land Tribunal by order dated 29-10-1980 for fresh disposal in accordance with law. Thereafter, the Land Tribunal renumbered as LRF 5526/81-82 and after enquiry, it passed an order dated 31-10-1981 granting occupancy rights in favors of the third respondent. Being aggrieved, the appellant’s father filed W.P.No.30915/1981 before this Court. By order dated 13-3-1985, this Court allowed the said petition and again remanded the matter to the Tribunal for fresh consideration on the ground that enquiry contemplated under Rule 17 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Rules, 1974, was not held by the Land Tribunal. Thereafter, the matter was again renumbered as LRF Nos.2813/76 & 3928/71. The land Tribunal, after considering the evidence adduced by both the parties and after hearing the arguments rejected the claim of the third respondent herein by order dated 19-5-1998. Being aggrieved, third respondent filed W.P.No.22692/1998 before this Court. The learned Single Judge of this Court, by order dated 26-7-2004 allowed the said writ petition by setting aside the order passed by the Land Tribunal. This court allowed writ petition and quashed the order dated 19-5-1998 and allowed form No.7 filed by husband of third respondent and the Tribunal was directed to register the third respondent and other legal heirs of deceased Chotusab as occupants of the land in question and was directed to issue occupancy certificates to them and effect necessary entries in RTC records within a period of three months. Assailing the said order of the learned Single Judge, this writ appeal is filed by the appellant.

3. We have heard the arguments of learned senior counsel appearing for the parties. Perused the records.

4. It is argued by learned senior counsel for the appellant that late Chotusab filed form No.7 for grant of occupancy rights in respect of land Sy.No.64 of Kowdanahalli village to the extent of 1 acre 32 guntas on 18-5-1976. But late Chotusab was assigned Sy.No.65 measuring 5.32 guntas as per Ex.P-5 and not Sy.No.64 and the land Sy.No.64 was assigned to one Ameersab, brother-in-law of Chotusab. Sy.nos.64 and 65 together were surrendered by tenants to the land lord on 14-3-1967 before the Court of Munsiff, Bangalore. This goes to show that occupancy rights granted in favour of respondent-3-wife of Chotusab in respect of land bearing Sy.No.64 was totally incorrect since Chotusab and Ameersab who had voluntarily applied to the Munsiff Court, Bangalore and after receiving the notice, filed objections in form No.1 as contemplated under the rules prevailing. Since aforesaid lands are village offices inam land i.e., Shanbhog/patwari, with effect f