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

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
SHRI. LOKAPPA – Appellant
Versus
SHRI. HANAMAPPA – Respondent
WP/104286/2016



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

DHARWAD BENCH

DATED THIS THE 11th DAY OF AUGUST 2021

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY

W.P.No.104286/2016 (SC/ST)

BETWEEN:

SHRI. LOKAPPA, S/O RAMAPPA TELI

SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS.

1. SMT BASAWWA W/O LOKAPPA TELI

AGE: 63 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE

R/O MUDDAPUR-587313,

TQ: MUDHOL, DIST: BAGALKOT.

2 . SHRI NAGAPPA S/O LOKAPPA TELI

AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE

R/O MUDDAPUR-587313,

TQ: MUDHOL, DIST: BAGALKOT.

...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. AKSHAY A.KATTI, ADV.)

AND

1. SHRI. HANAMAPPA S/O YALLAPPA MADAR

AGE: 53 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE

R/O MUDDAPUR-587313,

TQ: MUDHOL, DIST: BAGALKOT.

2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

J.S.D. JAMKHANDI 587301

DIST: BAGALKOT

3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

2

BAGALKOT, NAVANAGAR,

BAGALKOT 587102.

….RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. G.I. GACHCHINAMATH, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1

SRI. H.K.BASAVARAJ, AGA FOR R2 & R3)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 &

227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE

ORDER

DATED

19.05.2016

PASSED

BY

THE

DEPUTY

COMMISSIONER,

BAGALKOT

(RESPONDENT

NO.3)

IN

PTCL:AP:01/2013-14 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-'H'.

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY

HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY THE COURT MADE THE

FOLLOWING:

ORDER

The petitioners have approached this Court in the instant

writ petition with a prayer to quash the order dated 19.05.2016

passed by respondent No.3 in the proceedings bearing

No.PTCL:AP:01/2013-14.

2.

Brief facts of the case that would be relevant for the

purpose of disposal of this petition are:

(a) The land bearing R.S.No.25 measuring 5 acres 27 guntas

was originally granted to the father of respondent No.1

herein in the year 1959 and after his death on 28.05.1979,

respondent No.1 and his brother Durgappa had succeeded

to the said property. Out of 5 acres 27 guntas of land,

3

respondent No.1 and his brother-Durgappa had sold 2 acres

28 guntas in favour of one Lokappa Teli, the husband of

petitioner No.1 and father of the petitioner No.2, under the

registered

sale

deed

dated

26.10.1989

and

there

afterwards, the remaining extent of 2 acres 39 guntas was

purchased by Lokappa Teli under the registered sale deed

dated 18.03.1993 and thereby he had acquired right and

title over the entire extent of 5 acres 27 guntas of land in

R.S. No.25 (new No.25/2). The said Lokappa Teli died on

07.11.2016. After his death, the name of the petitioners

were entered in the revenue records of the land in question.

(b) When the matter stood thus, the legal representatives of

the original grantee i.e., the wife, daughters and Durgappa

had filed an application before respondent No.2 on

26.05.2005 requesting to cancel the sale deeds dated

26.10.1989 and 18.03.1993 executed in favour of late Shri

Lokappa Teli. Respondent No.2 after securing necessary

reports from the Tahasildar held an enquiry and rejected

the application filed by the legal representatives of the

original grantee by his order dated 03.11.2005. The said

order was not questioned by the applicants. There

4

afterwards, respondent No.1 herein filed a separate

application on 18.12.2007 once again with the prayer to

nullify the sale deeds executed in favour of late Lokappa

Teli and for restoration of possession of the land in

question. Respondent No.2 by order dated 15.07.2010 vide

Annexure-E rejected said application filed by respondent

No.1 herein on the ground that in the earlier round, similar

application filed by other legal representatives of the

original grantee had already been rejected by him by order

dated 03.11.2005. As against the said order dated

15.07.2010

passed

by

the

Assistant

Commissioner,

respondent No.1 herein filed an appeal before Deputy

Commissioner belatedly in the year 2013 and also filed an

application for condoning the delay caused in filing such

appeal. During the pendency of the appe

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