SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

SHIVARAJU – Appellant
Versus
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER – Respondent


DATED

17.01.2022

PASSED

IN

W.A.NO.850/2021 (SC/ST) CONSIDERING THE GROUNDS RAISED

HEREIN.

THIS PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR

ORDERS ON 17.06.2022, THIS DAY, RAVI V. HOSMANI J.,

PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING:

- 4 -

ORDER

Challenging judgment dated 17.01.2022 passed by

Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.850/2021, this review

petition is filed.

Heard learned counsel for review applicant as well

as learned Additional Government Advocate for Respondent

Nos. 1 and 2 and learned counsel for Respondent Nos. 7 and 8.

The appearance of Respondent Nos. 3 to 6 is dispensed, as

they were not contesting parties in the writ petition and writ

appeal being the legal heirs of original allottees.

Sri. Jayakumar S. Patil, learned Senior Counsel

appearing for Sri. Raveendra V. Reddy, Advocate for review

petitioners

submitted

that

review

petitioners

are

legal

representatives of Laguma @ Dekka, who was originally

granted land bearing Sy.No.94 measuring 2 acres 37 guntas of

Thanisandra village, Krishnarajapuram Hobli, under Darkhast

Rules, on 20.01.1937.

On 16.12.1994, Sri A. Stephen - husband of

respondent no.7, purchased said land from two out of six

children of original grantee, under r

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top