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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 38498

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
CHIEF JUSTICE AND C M JOSHI
GUDDE NINGAPPA SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
WA 1131/2025



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI WRIT APPEAL NO. 1131 OF 2025 (LR)

BETWEEN:

GUDDE NINGAPPA SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS, 1. MANCHAPPA S/O LATE GUDDE NINGAPPA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS AGRICULTURIST R/O. CHIKKAVALI VILLAGE UDRI POST, SORAB TALUK SHIMOGGA DISTRICT - 577 419.

…APPELLANT (BY SRI S.V. PRAKASH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally signed 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA by PRABHAKAR BY ITS SECRETARY SWETHA KRISHNA N DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE VIDHANA SOUDHA Location: High Court of BANGALORE - 560 001.

Karnataka

2. THE LAND TRIBUNAL SORABA BY ITS CHAIRMAN ASSITANT COMMISSIONER, SAGAR SORABA SHIMOGA DISTRICT - 577 419.

P LASKHMOJI RAO SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS

3. P.L. KUMAR RAO SINDHE S/O LATE P LAKSHMOJI RAO MAJOR R/O TOWN PANCHAYATH SORABA TALUK SHIVAMOGGA TALUK AND DISTRICT - 577 419.

4. RAJASHEKAR GOWDA S/O VEERASANGANA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS R/O. CHIKKAVALI VILLAGE UDRI POST SORABA TALUK SHIVAOGGA DISTRICT - 577 419.

CHANDRAPPA GOWDA SINCE DEAD BY HIS LEGAL HEEIRS

5. PREMAMMA W/O LATE CHANDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS HOMEMAKER R/O CHIKAKBALLI VILLAGE UDRI POST, SORABA TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT - 577 419.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI K.S. HARISH, GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR R-1 & 2 SRI VEERENDRA R. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR C/R-4)

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 17.04.2025 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN W.P.No.30088/2018 THEREBY SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 20.03.2018 IN CASE No.T.N.C.V.R 12/76-77, PASSED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT WHEREIN THE OCCUPANCY RIGHTS IN FAVOUR OF FATHER OF THE APPELLANT WAS CONFERRED IN RESPECT OF THE LAND MEASURING 3 ACRES 11 GUNTAS IN SY.No.1/2 CHIKKAVALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, SORABA TALUK BY ALLOWING THIS WRIT APPEAL & ETC.

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR JUDGMENT, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS PRONOUNCED AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI

CAV JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE)

1. For the reasons stated in the application-I.A.No.1/2025, the same is allowed. The delay in filing the appeal is condoned.

2. The appellant has filed the present appeal impugning an order dated 17.04.2025 [impugned order] passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.30088/2018 (LR) captioned, 'Rajashekar Gowda and another v. State of Karnataka by its Secretary, Department of Revenue and others'.

3. Respondent Nos.4 and 5 [writ petitioners] had preferred the said petition impugning an order dated 20.03.2018 passed by respondent No.2 [the Land Tribunal] whereby, occupancy rights in respect of the subject land was granted in favour of the appellant. The learned Single Judge had allowed the writ petition and set aside the order dated 20.03.2018, rejecting the appellant's claim for tenancy rights in respect of the land measuring 3 acres 11 guntas, comprising part of the land falling in Survey No.1/2 located in Chikkavali Village, Kasaba Hobli, Soraba Taluk, Shivamogga District [the subject land].

4. The appellant claims that one Mr.P.Lakshmoji Rao, since deceased – who is the father of respondent No.3 – had purchased the subject land from its previous owner, Mr.Maheshwarappa Gowda, on 10.02.1965. According to the appellant, his father was a tenant of late Mr.P.Lakshmoji Rao in respect of the subject land.

5. On 24.09.1976, the father of the appellant (Mr.Gudde Ningappa, S/o.Dyavappa) filed an application, in the prescribed Form No.7, for registering himself as an occupant of the subject land under Section 45 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961. He claimed that he had been cultivating the subject land for more than ten years and sought occupancy rights in respect of the subject land. Late Mr.P.Lakshmoji Rao contested the said application and disputed that the applicant, Mr.Gudde Ningappa, was a tenant in respect of the subject land

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 Back to top