Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
RAJESH RAI K
Chikki Hengsu, W/o. Late Mahabala Bhandary, Since Dead – Appellant
Versus
Ramani, W/o. Late Raju Bhandary – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of the case and factual details. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 2. arguments regarding occupancy rights and claims. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 3. court’s analysis and reasoning regarding claims. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 19) |
| 4. jurisdictional limits of land tribunal versus civil court. (Para 17 , 18) |
| 5. final dismissal of the petition. (Para 20) |
ORDER :
RAJESH RAI K., J.
1. In this writ petition, the petitioners sought for a writ of certiorari to quash the impugned order dated 10.04.2017 passed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal (for brevity "KAT") in Appeal No.196/2014 at Annexure-'A'.
2. It is the case of the petitioners that, one Baby Hengsu is the propositus and she had three sons namely Mahabala Bhandary, Raju Bhandary and Vasu Bhandary. Petitioner No.1 is the wife and petitioner Nos. 2 to 5 are the children of Mahabala Bhandary, who died on 31.07.1979. Respondent No.1 is the wife and respondents 2 and 3 are the children of Raju Bhandary. Vasu Bhandary was respondent No.4 and on his death, his legal heirs are on record as respondents 4(a) to 4 (e). Baby Hengsu was cultivating the lands measuring 32 cents in Sy.No.85/8, 4 cents in Sy.No.84/6 and 1 acre 62 ce
Occupancy rights under the Karnataka Land Reforms Act require a formal application, and family members cannot claim rights over land without such filing.
The evidentiary value of the Civil Court's judgment, the presumptive value of revenue records, and the limited scope of interference in a revision petition under Sec. 121-A of the Act were the centra....
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 court upheld the validity of the Land Tribunal's order, emphasizing that procedural deficiencies claimed by the petitioners did not affect the merits of the case.
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
