Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH
V Srishananda, J.
Shri Narasappa S/o Lachappa Muthangi - Appellant
Vs.
The Secretary Revenue Dept/Vikasa Soudha, Bangalore - Respondent
Writ Petition No.17861 OF 2011 (LR)
Decided On : 13-03-2024
Land Reforms Act - Tenancy Rights - Section 48A - 2(20), 2(34) - The court dismissed the writ petition seeking occupancy rights over the land, as the petitioner failed to establish tenancy under the Land Reforms Act. The court found that the petitioner could not be considered a tenant under Section 2(34) and the alleged landlord could not be treated as a landlord under Section 2(20). The court concluded that the grounds urged in the writ petition were insufficient to annul the order passed by the Land Tribunal.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought occupancy rights over a land claiming to be a tenant since 1961 under a 'Kavlanama'. The Land Tribunal rejected the application, leading to the writ petition.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner failed to establish tenancy under the Land Reforms Act and dismissed the writ petition.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioner could establish tenancy under the Land Reforms Act and claim occupancy rights over the land.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioner could not be considered a tenant under Section 2(34) of the Land Reforms Act and the alleged landlord could not be treated as a landlord under Section 2(20).
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed by the court.
ORDER :
Heard Sri Huleppa Heroor, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Ameet Kumar Deshpande, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri Gourish S. Khashampur, learned counsel for respondent No.4 and learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent Nos.1 to 3.
2. The writ petition is filed with the following prayer:
B] Pass an order staying the impugned order dated 19-4-2011, passed by the 2nd Respondent/Land Tribunal, Humnabad, in No/LR/CR-217/1975-76 dismissing the application filed in Form no-7 by the petitioner, the order herewith produced as Annexure-A and also restrain Respondent No-4 from alienating, encumbering or creating any third party right over the schedule land. And also restrain them from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the schedule land by the petitioner and his family and C] Grant such other and further reliefs as the Court may deem fit to grant under the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity.”
3. The facts in brief which are utmost necessary for disposal of the writ petition are as under:
4. The said application was registered in LRM/Cr. 217/75-76. The occupancy rights were granted over the said land at the first instance. Sri Veerabhadreshwara temple committee being the owner of the land in question preferred a writ petition before this Court in W.P.No.8912/1976. The said writ petition was disposed of by order dated 08.11.1982 quashing the order granting the occupancy right in favour of the petitioner and remitted the matter to the Land Tribunal for fresh disposal in accordance with law.
5. The Tribunal subsequently, held an enquiry and decided that the petitioner is not a tenant and therefore, rejected form No.7. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed a writ petition No.29586/2002 before this Court. Again this Court quashed the order of the Land Tribunal by order dated 24.07.2002 once again remanded the matter to the Tribunal for fresh consideration after affording suitable opportunity for the petitioner to produce the additional documentary evidence, if any, to establish that he was the tenant.
6. Subsequent there to, the Land reforms afforded sufficient opportunity to the parties and passed an order at Annexure – A again rejecting the form No.7 filed by the petitioner by order dated 19.04.2011 marked at Annexure– A.
7. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has proffered the present writ petition on the following grounds:
(2) The impugned order rejecting the Occupancy right in favour of the petitioner is incorrect, improper and illegal and it is not sustainable both in law and on facts.
(3) The Petitioner is the tenant since 1961 under kavlanama executed in the year 1961. From 1961 to till now he is cultivating the said land. The land tribunal in its order dated 29-4-1976 after making proper enquiry granted the occupancy right in favour of the appellant here in, but the respondents here in not produced any such documents showing that the petitioner not at all in possession o
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the petitioner's failure to establish tenancy under the Land Reforms Act led to the dismissal of the writ petition seeking occupancy rights....
Land Reforms Act, 1961 is undoubtedly a beneficial legislation. It is important to remember that this piece of legislation is meant to preserve, protect and also confer benefits on persons who are ab....
(1) Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 is a beneficent legislation for granting occupancy rights to cultivating tenants of agricultural lands.(2) Order of remand cannot be passed as a matter of course ....
The occupancy rights under the Karnataka Land Reforms Act were granted based on established tenancy, even after land ownership changes, emphasizing the primacy of RTC entries unless lawfully challeng....
The central legal point established is the importance of evidence demonstrating cultivation and occupation in determining tenancy rights, which can outweigh challenges based on mortgage deeds and rev....
The court established that once an application under Form No. 7 is rejected, a subsequent application under Form No. 7A cannot be filed, affirming the civil court's jurisdiction over property dispute....
Point of Law : Land Tribunal is bound by the statutory presumption as to entries made in record of rights and order of the Tribunal without any reference to such entries and having no discussion as ....
Continuance of unrecorded tenancy established due to failure of original tenants to validate their surrender of tenancy, reinforcing tenancy rights under the applicable laws.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
