1. This writ appeal was filed by the petitioner Sri.Hasansab son of Allasaheb Pendari, who is now represented by his Legal Representatives aggrieved by the order dated 18th December 2013 of the learned Single Judge dismissing his Writ Petition No.39146 of 2014 (LR).

2. The appellant in the present third round of litigation has been claiming occupancy rights under the provisions of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) in respect of the land bearing Sy.No.258 measuring 17 acres 19 guntas situated at Kelageri Village, Dharwad District.

3. The appellant claims to be a tenant of the respondent No.3, Sri.Shanthaveerappa Chandrashekarappa Menasinakai and claims that from the time of his father since 1965, his father and the appellant were cultivating the land of the respondent No.3 land-lord and in view of Section 4 of the Act, they were to be deemed to be the tenants in respect of the said land and the learned Land Tribunal ought to have given the Occupancy Certificate in favour of the appellant-petitioner.

4. The case has a long checkered history and in the first instance, the appellant filed application in Form No.7 before the learned Land Tribunal which came to be rejected on 26th December 1981, against which the appellant filed a Writ Petition in W.P. No.30439 of 1982, which came to be allowed by the High Court on 03rd January 1985 and the matter was remanded to the Land Tribunal for fresh enquiry. However, upon remand, on 10th April 1991, the claim of the appellant was allowed and therefore, the respondent No.3, Shanthaveerappa challenged the said order of the Land Tribunal dated 10th April 1991 by way of a Writ Petition in W.P. No.13792 of 1992 which came to be allowed by the High Court on 06th November 1996 and again the matter was remanded back to the Land Tribunal for fresh enquiry. This time, the learned Land Tribunal rejected the application of the appellant by order dated 01st July 2002 and refused to grant the occupancy rights to the appellant. Aggrieved by which, the present Writ Petition No.39146 of 2004 (LR) was filed by Sri.Hasansab Allasab Pendari, which came to be dismissed by the learned Single Judge on 18th December 2013 and against which the present intra-court appeal has been filed.

5. It would be relevant to reproduce some portions of the impugned orders passed by the Land Tribunal on 01st July 2002 and the order passed by the learned Single Judge on 18th December 2013.

6. The learned Land Tribunal in its order dated 01st July 2002 observed as under:

“The applicant has completely failed to prove that, land in dispute was an agricultural land as on 01/03/1974 since, if the land in dispute was an agricultural land, it would vest in the Government as per section 44 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act. But, the land in dispute has not vested in the government as per the said Act and neither during 1973-74 nor prior thereof, respondent is reflected to be in personal cultivation of the land in dispute and method of cultivation is mentioned as 1.

Applicant has failed to prove the landlord-tenant relationship between himself and the landlord. On examining the document relied upon by the applicant i.e. agreement, it appears that, respondent Shanthaveerappa Chandrashekarappa Menasinakayi had granted the land in dispute to the applicant for grazing the cattle at Rs.75-00 per annum and it appears that, agreement is entered for using the grass grown in the said land and for removing the weeds grown in the said land and preparing it for cultivation. Similarly, it also appears that, there is agreement that, only till the said land is cultivable, applicant has to be pay charges towards grass to the respondent at the rate of Rs.75/-per annum and obtain receipt for the same.

It is very clear that, after the said land is suitable for cultivation, they shall act according the agreement. The same is admitted by the applicant in his cross-examination and has replied in the cross-examination that, there is no