Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 19395
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026
BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
WRIT PETITION NO. 8660 OF 2026 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI SHEKARA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, S /O. LATE PADDU
2. SRI. ESHWARA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, S/O. LATE PADDU
3. SRI. DIVAKARA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, S/O. LATE PADDU
4. SMT. YAMUNA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, W/O. LATE ASHOKA, D by ig C it H al A ly IT s H ig R n A e d A 5. SOUJANYA L C o O c U at R io T n O : F H IGH AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, KARNATAKA D/O. LATE ASHOKA,
6. ANITHA, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, D/O. LATE ASHOKA,
7. ARUN AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS, S/O. LATE ASHOKA,
ALL ARE RESIDING AT, AVARSELINGANAMANE, AVARSE POST AND VILLAGE, BRAHMAVARA TALUK, UDUPI- 576223.
…PETITIONERS (BY SMT. SHWETHA NAYAK N., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU- 560001.
2. THE LAND TRIBUNAL, UDUPI TALUK, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN / TAHSILDAR, UDUPI TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT- 576101
3. SRI VISHWANANTH SHETTY, S/O. LATE. A KAMALAKSHI SHEDTHI, AGED ABOUT 83 YEARS, R/AT. VISHALA HOSPITAL, KODIYAL BAIL, MANGALORE- 575003.
4. SMT. VANITHA R. SHETTY, W/O. RATHNAKARARAMANNA SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/AT. HILIYANAVILLAGE, BRAHMAVARA, UDUPI- 576223.
5. MR. NARAYANA POOJARI, S/O. KARIYAMMA POOJARTHI, AGED ABOUT 81 YEARS, ACHLADY VILLAGE, R/AT. MADHUVANA, UDUPI TALUK- 576225.
6. SMT. GIRIJA POOJARTHI, D/O. KARIYAMMA POOJARTHI, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,
7. SMT. JALAJA POOJARTHI, D/O. KARIYAMMA POOJARTHI, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, BOTH ARE RESIDING AT, LINGANAMANE, MOODBETTU, AVARSHE VILLAGE AND POST, UDUPI TALUK- 574105.
8. THE TAHSILDAR, UDUPI TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT- 576101.
…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ADITYA DIWAKARA, AGA FOR R1,2,8)
The Writ petition is dismissed.
SD/-
(SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM)
JUDGE
BVK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21
THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE COMPROMISE DECREE DATED 21.08.2013 PASSED IN O.S. NO.347/2012 BEFORE THE LOK ADALAT HELD AT KUNDAPURA ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, KUNDAPURA, WHICH IS PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-A., AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
ORAL ORDER
1. The captioned petition is filed by the legal heirs of one Kariyamma questioning the compromise decree recorded in O.S.No.347/2012 vide order on 21.08.2013.
2. The present petitioners, claiming to be the legal heirs of one Kariyamma, contend that respondent No.3, in collusion with certain family members of the petitioners, namely Narayan Poojari, Girja Poojarthi, and Jalaja Poojarathi who also assert themselves to be the legal heirs of Kariyamma has secured a compromise decree in O.S. No.347/2012. Aggrieved by the said compromise decree, the petitioners have instituted the present writ petition calling in question its legality and validity.
3. Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners.
4. This Court has bestowed its anxious consideration to the material placed on record. Before adverting to the question as to whether the compromise decree passed in O.S. No.347/2012 warrants interference at this stage particularly when the compromise was recorded as far back as in the year 2013 ,this Court deems it appropriate to first examine the order rendered by the Co-ordinate Bench in W.P. No.28689/1991. In that view of the matter, this Court considers it apposite to extract paragraphs 4 to 11, including the concluding portion of paragraph 11, which read as follows:
“4. When the said writ petition was pending before this Court, the Land Reforms Appellate Authority was constituted. This Court transferred the matter to the Land Reforms Appellate Authority, Udupi, where it was numbered LRA.439/88. Subsequently, the Land Reforms Appellate Authority was abolished and C.F.No.1844/91 came to be filed Challenging the orders in question.
5. This Court by a separate order has converted the C.P. into writ petition.
6. Respondent no.3 -Belku Hengsu has filed Form No.7 (Annexure-B) claiming the tenancy rights in respect of half of the property in 1 acre 42 guntas in Survey No. 89/1 of Hiriyana village in Udupi Taluk.
7. Smt. Kariyamma Pujathi, sister of Responndent no.3 -Belku Hengsu, also filed Form No.7 claiming the occupancy rights of the property in 1 acre 42 guntas in Survey No. 89/1 situated in Hiriyana village in Udupi Taluk.
8. On the basis of the two Forms No. 7.the Land Tribunal, Udupi, has passed the impugned orders.
9. The Land Tribunal, Udupi, has granted1 acre 30 cents to Respondent no.3 and 1 acre 20 cents to her sister Smt. Kariyamma Pujathi, though each claimed occupancy rights in respect of half the extent.
10. In the circumstances, in which Form No.7 was filed by each of the claimants separately, it was obligatory on the part of the Land Tribunal, to club both the two applications and pass a common order. That has not been done in this case.
11. Great injustice has been caused to the petitioners. Respondents 1 and 2 each claimed half the extent of 1 acre 42 cents, what the Land Tribunal, has done is that it has granted 1 acre 30 cents + 1 acre 20 cents = 2 acres 50 cents in all.For the aforesaid reasons the writ petition is allowed. The impugned orders dated 4-12-1980 as per Annexure ‘C’ and ‘D’ marked in W.P.No.13461/83 are hereby quashed and the matter is remanded to the Land Tribunal. Udupi, to dispose of the matter in accordance with law, after issue of notice to all the parties and holding enquiry, if necessary. The writ petition is allowed and the matter remanded as stated herein. No costs. Rule made absolute.”[Emphasis Supplied]
5. On a meticulous and closer examination of the order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench in
