Back
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
AND
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
W.A.NO.4897/2011(KLRA)
C/W
W.A.NO.5201/2011 (KLRA)
IN W.A. NO.4897/2011:
BETWEEN:
PADMANAHBHAIAH
SINCE DEAD BY LR'S
1.
SMT. LAKSHMI
W/O LATE PADMANABHAIAH
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS.
2.
JAYAPRAKASH N
S/O LATE PADMANABHAIAH N
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
1 AND 2 ARE R/O PANCHAKSHARI
PERLAPU (P), KADESHIVALAYA
BANTWAL TALUK, DAKSHINA
KANNADA DISTRICT.
3.
SHAILASHRI MOHAN
W/O MOHAN
D/O LATE PADMANABHAIAH N
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
R/O B/6, "ADVAITHA", 2ND A MAIN
11TH BLOCK, NAGARABHAVI 2ND
STAGE, BENGALURU - 560 072.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI S.P. SHANKAR, SR. COUNSEL FOR
SRI S.S. PARIKSHIT, ADV.)
2
AND:
RAMAYYA AITHALA
SINCE DEAD BY LRS
1.
VENKATARAMANA AITHALA @
VENKATAKRISHNA AITHALA
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
WORKING AS COOK IN
SRI KOLLUR MUKAMBIKA TEMPLE
KOLLUR, KUNDAPUR TALUK.
2.
VISHVESHVARAYYA
S/O SADASHIVAYYA
AGED ABOUT 83 YEARS
R/AT HALASANAU, HAKLADY
VILLAGE, KUNDAPUR TALUK.
3.
LAND REFORMS APPELLATE
KUNDAPURA TALUK
KUNDAPURA, D.K.
4.
CHANDRASHEKARA SHETTY
SINCE DEAD BY LR'S
4a.
SMT. SUSHELLA C. SHETTY
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
W/O LATE U. CHANDRASHEKHAR SHETTY.
4b.
DR. RAJESH KUMAR A
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
S/O LATE U. CHANDRASHEKHAR SHETTY.
4c.
SRI ROOPESH KUMAR A
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
S/O LATE U. CHANDRASHEKHAR SHETTY.
4d.
MISS RASHMI KUMARI
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
D/O LATE U. CHANDRASHEKHAR SHETTY
ALL ARE R/O "NAGALAKSHMI"
KALLATGTE, HALADY POST
KUNDAPURA TALUK
UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 222. ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K. SUMAN, SR. COUNSEL FOR
SRI SIDDARTH SUMAR, ADV., FOR R-1;
3
V/O DATED 21.09.2012 APPEAL AGAINST R-2 IS
DISMIEES AS ABATED; R-3 IS SERVED;
R-4(a), (b) AND 4(d) ARE SERVED;
SRI AJITH SHETTY, ADV., FOR R-4(c);
SRI B. RAJENDRA PRASAD, HCGP FOR R-5)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER
PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN W.P.NO.25075/1994
DATED 22.02.2011 AND ALLOW THIS APPEAL.
IN W.A. NO.5201/2011:
BETWEEN:
LATE CHANDRASHEKAR SHETTY
SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LEGAL HEIRS
1a.
SMT. SUSHEELA C SHETTY
W/O LATE CHANDRASHEKAR SHETTY
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS.
1b.
DR. RAJESH KUMAR A
S/O LATE CHANDRASHEKAR SHETTY
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS.
1c.
SRI ROOPESH KUMAR A
S/O LATE CHANDRASHEKAR SHETTY
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS.
1d.
MISS RASHMI KUMARI
S/O LATE CHANDRASHEKAR SHETTY
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS.
ALL ARE RESIDING AT 'NAGALAKSHMI'
KALLATGE, P.O. HALADY
KUNDAPUR TALUK
UDUPI - 576 222. …APPELLANTS
(BY SRI S.P. SHANKAR, SR. COUNSEL FOR
SRI AJITH SHETTY, ADV.)
AND:
1.
SRI VENKATARAMANA AITHAL
@ VENKATAKRISHNA AITHAL
S/O RAMAYYA AITHAL
4
AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS
C/O SHREE MOOKAMBIKA TEMPLE
KOLLUR KUNDAPURA TALUK
UDUPI DISTRICT.
2.
VISHWESHWARAYYA
S/O SADASHIVAYYA
AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS
RESIDING AT BALASANADU
HAKLADY VILLAGE & POST
KUNDAPURA, UDUPI.
3.
LATE PADMANABHAYYA
SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LEGAL HEIRS
3(a) SMT. LAKSHMI
W/O LATE PADMANABHAIAH
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS.
3(b) SRI JAYAPRAKASH N
S/O LATE PADMANABHAIAH
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
BOTH ARE RESIDING AT PANCHAKSHARI
PARALAPU POST, KADESHIVALAYA
BANTWALA TALUK, MANGALORE.
3(c)
SMT. SHAILASHRI MOHAN
D/O LATE PADMANABHAIAH
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.6.6, ADVAITH
2ND 'A' MAIN, 11TH BLOCK
NAGARBHAVI, 2ND STAGE
BANGALORE - 560 072.
4.
LAND REFORMS APPELLATE AUTHORITY
KUNDAPURA
BY ITS SECRETARY. …RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K. SUMAN, SR. COUNSEL FOR
SRI SIDDARTH SUMAR, ADV., FOR R-1;
V/O DATED 21.09.2012 APPEAL AGAINST
R-2 IS DISMISSED AS ABATED;
SRI S.N. BHAT, ADV., FOR R-3;
SRI B. RAJENDRA PRASAD, HCGP FOR R-4)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
5
ORDER PASSED IN THE WRIT PETITION NO.25075/1994
DATED 22.02.2011.
THESE APPEALS HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESEVED,
COMING
ON
FOR
PRONOUNCEMENT,
THIS
DAY,
VISHWAJITH SHETTY J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
These two intra court appeals have been filed
assailing the order dated 22.02.2011 passed by the
learned
Single
Judge
of
this
Court
in
W.P.No.25075/1994, and therefore, they are heard
together and disposed of by this common judgment.
2. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the
parties and also perused the material available on record.
3. Brief facts of the case as revealed from the
records for the purpose of disposal of these two appeals
are, respondent no.2 herein is the owner of lands bearing
Sy. No.45/2 measuring 19 cents and Sy. No.45/3
measuring 20.5 cents situated at Kollur village in Udupi
District. Respondent no.1 herein who allegedly was a
tenant in the building situated in a portion of the
aforesaid lands and who was serving as a priest in a local
temple of Lord Ganapathi had filed Form No.7 under the
6
Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 (for short, 'Act of
1961') claiming occupancy rights of the aforesaid lands.
4. The Land Tribunal, initially, rejected the said
claim vide its order dated 21.10.1975 holding that the
lands which were the subject matter of Form No.7 were
not agricultural lands and there was no agrarian
relationship between the applicant and the owner of the
lands. This order was questioned by respondent no.1
before this Court in W.P.No.5691/1982 which was
allowed and remanded by order dated 17.12.1982 on the
ground that the order of the Land Tribunal was not
signed by all its members.
5.
In
the
meanwhile,
the
appellant
in
W.A.No.4897/2011 Sri Padmanabhaiah had purchased
⅔rd portion of the land in question and the appellant in
W.A.No.5201/2011
Sri
Chandrashekhar
Shetty
had
purchased ⅓rd portion of the land in question along with
the building existing in the said lands under two separate
registered sale deeds.
6.
The
appellant
in
W.A.No.4897/2011
viz.,
Padmanabhaiah had got himself impleaded before the
7
Land Tribunal after the matter was remanded by this
Court in W.P.No.5691/1982. The Land Tribunal vide its
order dated 30.04.1987 granted occupancy rights of the
lands in question in favour of respondent no.1 herein.
This order was questioned before the Land Reforms
Appellate
Aurthority
by
Padmanabhaiah
in
LRA
No.1381/1988 and consequent to the abolition of the
Land Reforms Appellate Authority, Padmanabhaiah had
filed a civil petition before this Court under Section 17 of
the Karnataka Land Reforms (Amendment) Act No.18 of
1990, with a prayer to transfer the appeal that was
pending before the Land Reforms Appellate Authority and
register the same as writ petition before this Court. The
said civil petition was allowed and the appeal in LRA
No.1381/1988
was
transferred
to
this
Court
and
numbered as W.P.No.25075/1994. In the said writ
petition,
the
appellant
in
W.A.No.5201/2011
viz.,
Chandrashekhar Shetty had got himself impleaded as
respondent no.4.
7. The learned Single Judge of this Court vide order
dated 26.02.2008 had allowed the writ petition and
8
remanded the matter to the Land Tribunal for disposal in
accordance with law, and being aggrieved by the same,
respondent no.1 herein had filed W.A.Nos.296/2009 &
716/2009 which were allowed by the Division Bench of
this Court and the matter was remanded to the learned
Single Judge for fresh consideration on the ground that
the writ petition was disposed of without giving an
opportunity to the legal representatives of deceased
respondent no.1 to contest the writ petition. Thereafter,
the learned Single Judge of this Court vide the order
impugned
has
dismissed
the
writ
petition.
Being
aggrieved by the same, the petitioner and respondent
no.4 in W.P.No.25075/1994 have filed these two intra
court appeals.
8. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the
appellants submits that the land in question is a urban
land and not a land within the meaning of Section
2(A)(18) of the Act of 1961. He submits that the
appellants as well as respondent no.1 herein were
tenants of the building existing in the aforesaid land
which belonged to respondent no.2 and appreciating the
9
