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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 27518

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
R Devdas, J
G Revanna – Appellant
Versus
Chinnappa Reddy – Respondent
WRIT PETITON NO.20376 OF 2018 (LR) | WRIT PETITON NO.6806 OF 2021 (LR)



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Aravind H., Vivek Subba Reddy, Subba Reddy K N
For the Respondents: Vivek S. Reddy, K.N. Subbareddy, K.P. Yoganna, V. Basava Kumar

A party who has not filed an application for occupancy rights in Form No. 7 or Form No. 7A under the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961, lacks the locus standi to challenge an order of the competent authority granting occupancy rights to another.

Headnote:The case involves a dispute under the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961, specifically regarding the locus standi of individuals to challenge an order of the competent authority granting occupancy rights when they themselves have not filed an application in Form No. 7 or Form No. 7A. The petitioners challenged an appellate order that had set aside the grant of occupancy rights in their favor, arguing that the respondents lacked the standing to appeal as they were not rival claimants. The central issue is whether a person can challenge an order conferring occupancy rights on another if they have not submitted a formal application for such rights within the statutory timelines. The court examined the requirements for joint adjudication of rival claims and determined that while an authority must club and decide competing claims filed in time, it does not confer a right upon a person to challenge an order if they did not participate in the statutory process. The court allowed the writ petition filed by the occupiers, set aside the appellate tribunal's order, and dismissed the writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus against the revenue entries.

Table of Content
1. determining locus standi for challenging occupancy rights without filing a statutory tenant claim. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. requirement of rival applications being pending for the tribunal to have jurisdiction to set aside an earlier grant. (Para 4 , 5 , 6)
3. dismissal of consequential requests following the primary finding on locus standi. (Para 7 , 8 , 9)

IN WP No.20376 OF 2018

BETWEEN

1. SRI G REVANNA

S/O. LATE. PATEL GIRIGOWDA,

DEAD BY HIS LRS

1(a) SMT. PUTTAMMA

W/O LATE G.REVANNA

AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS

R/O. CHIKKANAGAMANGALA VILLAGE,

SARJAPURA HOBLI, HUSKUR POST,

ANEKAL TALUK,

BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT.

1(b) RANI @ CHANDRAKALA

W/O LATE MAHESH

AGE 33 YEARS

R/O. CHIKKANAGAMANGALA VILLAGE,

SARJAPURA HOBLI, HUSKUR POST,

ANEKAL TALUK,

BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT.

1(c) MAHESH

S/O RANI @ CHANDRAKALA

AGE 17 YEARS

1(d) KUMARI VARSHINI

D/O RANI @ CHANDRAKALA

AGE 13 YEARS

SINCE THE 1 (c) & 1(d) ARE MINOR

REP BY HER MOTHER BY 1(a)

1(e) PADMAVATHI

D/O LATE G.REVANNA

AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS

R/O. CHIKKANAGAMANGALA VILLAGE,

SARJAPURA HOBLI, HUSKUR POST,

ANEKAL TALUK,

BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT.

1(f) SANTOSH

S/O LATE G.REVANNA

AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS

R/O. CHIKKANAGAMANGALA VILLAGE,

SARJAPURA HOBLI, HUSKUR POST,

ANEKAL TALUK,

BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT.

2. SRI. G MUNIRAJU

S/O. LATE. PATEL GIRIGOWDA,

AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS

R/O. CHIKKANAGAMANGALA VILLAGE,

SARJAPURA HOBLI, HUSKUR POST,

ANEKAL TALUK,

BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT.

...PETITIONERS

(BY ARAVIND H., ADVOCATE)

AND

1. SRI CHINNAPPA REDDY

S/O. LATE. ABBAIAH REDDY,

SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS

1(a) SMT. AKKAYAMMA

W/O. LATE CHINNAPPA REDDY,

AGED ABOUT 85 YEARS,

R/O CHIKKANAGAMANGALA VILLAGE,

SARJAPURA HOBLI, HUSKUR POST,

ANEKAL TALUK,

BANGALRE RURAL DISTRICT.

1(b) SMT. JAYAMMA

W/O. GOPALREDDY,

D/O. LATE CHINNAPPA REDDY,

AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,

SINGASANDRA, BEGUR HOBALI,

BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK,

BANGALORE-99.

1(c) LALITHAMMA

W/O. KHEKAR REDDY,

D/O. LATE CHINNAPPA REDDY,

AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,

SARAKKI, BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK,

BEGUR HOBALI, BANGALORE.

1(d) MUNIREDDY

S/O. LATE CHINNAPPA REDDY,

AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS,

CHIKKANAGAMANGALA, HUSKUR POST,

ANEKAL TALUK,

BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT.

1(e) SMT. PADMA

W/O. NAGARAJA REDDY,

AGE MAJOR,

D/O. LATE CHINNAPPA REDDY,

VANGASANDRA, BEGUR HOBALI,

BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK,

BANGALORE.

1(f) SRINIVASA

S/O. LATE CHINNAPPA REDDY

AGE MAJOR,

CHIKKANAGAMANGALA,

HUSKUR POST, ANEKAL TALUK,

BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT.

1(g) SMT. KOMALA

W/O. NARAYANAPPA REDDY,

D/O. LATE CHINNAPPA REDDY,

AGE MAJOR,

H.S.R. LAYOUT, BANGALORE.

1(h) RAMESH

S/O. LATE CHINNAPPA REDDY,

AGE MAJOR,

CHIKKANAGAMANGALA,

HOSKUR POST, ANEKAL TALUK,

BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT.

2. SRI. KRISHNA REDDY

S/O. LATE. ABBAIAH REDDY,

AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS

R/O. CHIKKANAGAMANGALA VILLAGE,

SARJAPURA HOBLI, HUSKUR POST,

ANEKAL TALUK,

BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT.

3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

ANEKAL TALUK,

LAND DEVELOPMENT,

BENGLAURU RURAL DISTRICT.

4. SRI. C R MANJUNATH

S/O. LATE. RAMARAO,

AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS

R/O. VARTHUR,

BANGALORE EAST TALUK,

BANGALORE DISTRICT.

5. SRI. NANJUNDAIAH

S/O. LATE. NARAYANA RAO,

R5 DIED AND R4 TREATED AS LR OF

R5 V/O DT. 16.06.22.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. VIVEK S.REDDY., SR. COUNSEL FOR

SRI. K.N.SUBBAREDDY., ADVOCATE FOR R1(a TO h) & R2

SRI. K.P.YOGANNA., AGA FOR R3

SRI. V.BASAVA KUMAR., ADVOCATE FOR R4

R4 IS TREATED AS LR’S OF R5

V/O DT. 16/06/2022)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 &

227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING SET ASIDE THE

ORDER DTD 30.11.2017 PASSED IN APPEAL NO.25/2011 AT

ANNEXURE-J PASSED BY THE KARANATAKA APPEALLATE

TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE AND ETC.

IN WP No.6806 OF 2021

BETWEEN

1. SRI CHINNAPPA REDDY

SINCE DECEASED REP BY HIS LRS

1(a) SMT.AKKAYAMMA

W/O LATE CHINNAPPA REDDY

AGED 85 YEARS,

R/AT CHIKKANAGAMANGALA VILLAGE,

SARJAPURA HOBLI, HUSKUR POST,

ANEKAL TALUK

BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-560099

1(b) SMT.JAYAMMA

W/O GOPAL REDDY

AGED 65 YEARS

R/AT SINGASANDRA, BEGUR HOBLI,

BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK,

BEGUR HOBLI,

BANGALORE-560068.

1(c) SMT.LALITHAMMA

AGED 67 YEARS,

W/O SHEKAR REDDY

NO.2, NEAR RAMA MANDRI

S

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