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

SIDDAPPA S/O CHANDAPPA HADAPAD – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
WP 102717/2021



1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

DHARWAD BENCH

DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021

BEFORE

THE HON9BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

WRIT PETITION No.102717/2021 (KLR, RR/SUR)

Between

1.

Siddappa s/o Chandappa Hadapad

Age 51 years, Occ:Agriculture

r/o Adavibavi, Taluk:Kushtagi

District:Koppal, Now at r/o Ilkal

Taluk: Hungunda, Dist:Bagalkot

Pin:587118

2.

Smt.Yallamma w/o Basappa Hadapad

Age 50 years, Occ: Household work

r/o Adavibavi, Taluk:Kushtagi

District:Koppal, Now at r/o Ilkal

Taluk: Hungunda, Dist:Bagalkot

Pin:587118.

3.

Mahantesh s/o Basappa Hadapad

Age 26 years, Occ:Agriculture

r/o Adavibavi, Taluk:Kushtagi

Now at r/o Ilkal, Taluk: Hungunda

Dist:Bagalkot, Pin:587118.

4.

Smt.Mahantamma w/o Basappa Nandawadagi

Age 55 years, Occ: Household work

r/o Gotagi, Taluk:Kushtagi

District:Koppal.

2

5.

Smt.Sharavva w/o Shankrappa Hadapad

Age 46 years, Occ: Household work

r/o Kyadigumpa, Taluk:Kushtagi

District:Koppal, Pin:583277.

6.

Smt.Shanta w/o Girish Davakani

Age 45 years, Occ: Household work

r/o Bijapur, Taluk Bijapur, Dist: Bijapur

Pin:586101.

7.

Smt.Kamalamma w/o Kodaleppa Hadapad

Age 40 years, Occ: Household work

r/o Ilkal, Taluk Hungunda, Dist:Bagalkot

Pin:587118.

8.

Huligemma @ Ashwini

w/o Basavaraj Navi, Age 22 years,

Occ: Household work, Taluk:Kulagod

Taluk: Mudalagi, Dist:Belagavi

Pin:591312.

...Petitioners

(By Sri Shivaraj P Mudhol, Advocate)

A n d

1.

The State of Karnataka

Represented by its Secretary

Department of Revenue

M S Building, Bengaluru.

2.

The Deputy Commissioner

Koppal, Taluk Koppa, Dist: Koppal

Pin : 583231.

3.

The Tahasildar, Kushtagi

Taluk Kushtagi, Dist: Koppal

Pin: 583277.

Ramalingappa s/o Dandangouda

Malipatil, since died by his L.Rs.

3

4.

Ramappa s/o Ramalingappa Malipatil

Age 49 years, Occ: Agriculture

r/o Adavibavi, Taluk: Kushtagi

Dist: Koppal, Pin: 583277.

5.

Mohan s/o Kemappa Chowhan

Age 35 years, Occ: Agriculture

r/o Adavibavi, Taluk Kushtagi

Dist: Koppal, Now at r/o Ilkal

Taluk : Hungunda, Dist: Bagalkot

Pin 3 587118.

... Respondents

(By Smt.Girija S Hiremath, HCGP for R1 to R3

Sri Rajshekhar Burji, Advocate for R5,

R4 - served)

This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the

Constitution of India, praying to quash the impugned order ated

5.1.2006 in No.TAKAKU.RRT.20/2005-06 passed by the 3rd

respondent vide Annexure-F and etc.,.

This writ petition coming on for orders this day, the Court

passed the following:

ORDER

The mother of the 1st petitioner purchased the agricultural

land in Sy.No.76, Hissa No.4 measuring 16 acres 15 guntas

situated at Adavibavi village, Hanamasagar Hobli, Kushtagi Taluk

through a registered sale deed dated 9.4.1975 from the father of

the 4th respondent. Pursuant to the same, the name of the

mother of the 1st petitioner was mutated as owner in the

revenue records in respect of the land in question.

4

2.

When things stood thus, the father of the 4th

respondent filed an application with the 3rd respondent so as to

invalidate the sale deed executed in favour of the mother of the

1st petitioner. The Tahsildar by order dated 5.1.2006 invalidated

the sale deed executed in favour of the mother of the 1st

petitioner. Hence, this writ petition.

3.

I have considered the submissions of the learned

counsel for the parties.

4.

Admittedly,

the

mother

of

the

1st

petitioner

purchased the land in question through a registered sale deed in

her name and her name was mutated in the revenue record as

owner in respect of the land in question inconformity with

Section 128 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act.

5.

When such being the case, the Tahsildar by

exercising power under Section 25 of the Karnataka Land

Revenue Act has invalidated the registered sale deed executed in

favour of the mother of the 1st petitioner. Section 25 of the said

Act empowers the Revenue Court to make such orders as may

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top