Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
Kumki holders (warg land owners) enjoy non-proprietary privileges over adjacent kumki land for warg land benefit, with transferability alongside warg rights but subject to extinguishment for public purposes (e.g., via Deputy Commissioner under KLR Act §79(2)); no absolute ownership, but preferential assignment claim. Kumki right is only a privilege which is continued under Section 79 (2)... subject to... order to cancel Kumki privilege ["K. SHAM BHAT VS STATE OF KARNATAKA, SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT REVENUE DEPARTMENT - Karnataka"] ["MOHAMMED Vs STATE OF KERALA - Kerala"] ["CHANDRAHASA BHANDARY VS STATE OF KARNATAKA - 2021 0 Supreme(Kar) 876"] ["SMT ARTI KISHORE vs THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 441850"]
In the complex landscape of land laws in Karnataka, questions about rights over kumki land to the kumki holder often arise among farmers, landowners, and legal practitioners. Kumki lands, historically tied to agricultural holdings, grant specific privileges rather than outright ownership. This blog post breaks down these rights, drawing from key judicial interpretations and statutory provisions, to help you navigate this niche area of property law.
Whether you're a wargdar (holder of assessed land) or dealing with attached waste lands, understanding kumki entitlements can protect your interests. Note: This is general information based on case law and statutes; consult a qualified lawyer for advice specific to your situation.
Kumki land refers to government waste land situated within 100 yards of assessed warg land—land included in a holding formed prior to fasli 1276. The kumkidar (or kumki holder) is typically the registered holder (wargdar), walawargdar, or moolagenidar (mulgenidar) of the attached warg land. LAWERENCE MENDONSA VS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, KUNDAPURA - 1999 0 Supreme(Kar) 175
These holders enjoy privileges such as grazing cattle and collecting leaves, timber, or other forest produce for agricultural and domestic purposes. Importantly, these are not absolute property rights but appendages to the warg land enjoyment. As courts have noted, kumki land cannot be independently enjoyed, but to be enjoyed along with the main land or the warg land. LAWERENCE MENDONSA VS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, KUNDAPURA - 1999 0 Supreme(Kar) 175
A wargdar in long possession of attached kumki land cannot be penalized for unauthorized occupation under Section 94 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, underscoring these as recognized, property-like rights. M. RAMAKRISHNA BHAT VS TAHSILDAR, PUTTUR, DAKSHINA KANNADA - 1998 0 Supreme(Kar) 41
The privileges are incidental to the warg land and limited to:- Grazing livestock.- Cutting and collecting leaves, timber, and forest produce.- Use strictly for agricultural and domestic needs. LAWERENCE MENDONSA VS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, KUNDAPURA - 1999 0 Supreme(Kar) 175
These rights attach inseparably to the warg land, meaning they are not standalone but enhance the primary holding's utility.
Kumki entitlements transfer automatically with the warg land, much like a shadow follows the man. For instance, when warg lands are leased to chalageni tenants like Estine Mendonsa, the kumki rights also pass to them for enjoyment alongside the warg land. LAWERENCE MENDONSA VS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, KUNDAPURA - 1999 0 Supreme(Kar) 175
Even tenants granted occupancy rights under Sections 43 and 44 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act retain these privileges during vesting periods. This ensures continuity, rejecting claims of exclusive enjoyment by the original wargdar post-lease. LAWERENCE MENDONSA VS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, KUNDAPURA - 1999 0 Supreme(Kar) 175
Insights from other cases reinforce this. In a Kerala context, adjacent kumki lands grant preferential rights for assignment to wargh holders, but delays in claims must be addressed with due process. MOHAMMED Vs STATE OF KERALA - 2016 Supreme(Online)(KER) 27962 Similarly, privileges over kumki attached to family properties have been recognized in partition disputes, considering the kartha's (manager's) preferential assignment rights. Sudhakara Manolithaya VS Premalatha - 1990 Supreme(Ker) 437
Section 79(2) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act explicitly safeguards these rights: notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1) but subject to such general or special orders that may be issued by the state government from time to time, the privileges... in respect of kumki lands... shall continue. LAWERENCE MENDONSA VS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, KUNDAPURA - 1999 0 Supreme(Kar) 175
This provision ensures rights persist post-land reforms, overriding arguments of extinguishment upon vesting or grants to others. They must go along with the rights in the warg land. LAWERENCE MENDONSA VS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, KUNDAPURA - 1999 0 Supreme(Kar) 175
While protected, kumki rights are not absolute. They remain subject to government orders, empowering the Deputy Commissioner to extinguish them for public purposes, such as land disposal. RAJEEVI SHEDTHI VS SECRETARY, B. R. AMBEDKAR SAMAJA SEVA SANGHA (REGISTERED), PANCHAMI POLALI, BANTWAL TALUK, DAKSHINA KANNADA - 1999 0 Supreme(Kar) 399CHANDRAHASA BHANDARY VS STATE OF KARNATAKA - 2021 0 Supreme(Kar) 876
Courts uphold withdrawals in public interest, like for Haj Bhavan construction, noting that possession alone does not confer a matter of right. SMT ARTI KISHORE vs THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 441850 In one ruling, owners of kadeem varg lands have no right to lease kumki lands, which remain government property subject to privileges until assigned via darkhast (application). Assignment converts them, extinguishing kumki status. A. LAXMINARAYANA ACHARYA VS LAND TRIBUNAL UDUPI - 1980 Supreme(Kar) 36
Kerala cases echo limitations: Claims require applications under Kerala Land Assignment Rules, Rule 7A; without them, privileges cannot be exercised despite adjacent ownership. VASANTHA BHANDARI vs THE COMMISSIONER - 2016 Supreme(Online)(KER) 43184 Long possession (e.g., 40 years) does not override if challenged properly. MR. BENEDICT FERNANDES vs SISTER CHRISTIAN FERNANDES - 2023 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 31068
Kumki holders lack:- Independent title or conversion rights.- Extension to ryotwari pattas or separate grants.- Rights if warg land occupancy lapses. LAWERENCE MENDONSA VS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, KUNDAPURA - 1999 0 Supreme(Kar) 175
Government notices can withdraw rights without individual hearings for public use. Circulars denying post-occupancy rights may be quashed if ultra vires, but valid orders prevail. LAWERENCE MENDONSA VS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, KUNDAPURA - 1999 0 Supreme(Kar) 175SMT ARTI KISHORE vs THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 441850
In Karnataka Land Reforms Act contexts, tribunals reject occupancy claims over kumki without evidence of pre-amendment possession, emphasizing procedural verification. A. LAXMINARAYANA ACHARYA VS LAND TRIBUNAL UDUPI - 1980 Supreme(Kar) 36
To assert rights:- Document warg land leases or occupancy forms (e.g., Form 7) predating grant orders.- Challenge extinguishments via writs under Articles 226/227, citing Section 79(2).- Expect judicial deference to public-purpose withdrawals.- File expedition requests for regularization post-withdrawal. RAJEEVI SHEDTHI VS SECRETARY, B. R. AMBEDKAR SAMAJA SEVA SANGHA (REGISTERED), PANCHAMI POLALI, BANTWAL TALUK, DAKSHINA KANNADA - 1999 0 Supreme(Kar) 399
Kumki land laws balance traditional privileges with state control over waste lands. For tailored guidance, engage a local land law expert. Stay informed on government orders to safeguard your position.
The petitioners filed a detailed objection before respondent No.1 about their right, possession and the consequence of withdrawal of their kumki privilege and explained about the non-feasibility of the subject land for construction of Haj Bhavan as the said land was situated within the bank of Palguni ... As could be gathered from records, it is undisputed that the petitioners were in possession and enjoyment of kumki privilege in Sy.No.8/45 which is attached to their varga land and al....
Estine mendonsa and the kumki right in the subject land had to go along with the right of enjoyment of the warg land, it is obvious that the kumki right in the subject land was also vested in the said estine mendonsa. ... According to Sri shetty, kumki right in the subject land had to go along with the tenancy right in the warg lands as the original leaseholder estine mendonsa wa....
Respondent No. 1, herein was a registered holder of Kadim Warg Lands Survey Nos. 90/8, 90/9, 8, 22, 24 etc. of Kakkunji village under Kadim Kumki Right. Subsequently, land in Survey No. 91/9 along with its appurtenant kumki rights, was purchased by him from one K. Y. Adiga. ... A kumkidar is necessarily either the registered holder, walawargdar or mulgenidar of the land to which the kumki privilege is attached. ... 17. ... Rule 7 (A) of the Rules exp....
According to him in the nature of the kumki rights there could be no question of assignment of that right on the basis that such right vested in the Government only on 1st January 1970. Kumki land is really Government land. ... of trees on non warg lands like kumki land, for in South Kanara there is a kind of fleeting right in kumki and every wargdar is entitled to the adjoining unassigned land up....
A kumkidar is necessarily either the registered holder, walawargadar or mulgenidar of the land to which the kumki privilege is attached. 17. ... The right of kumkidars in respect of kumki lands and the grant of such lands for occupation are matters dealt in the orders of Board of Revenue, Madras. A copy of these orders has been placed before us. Para 40 (4) describes what is 'kumki land' in south Kanara District. ... use of the kumki land#H....
Adjacent to the said 'wargh' land was 0.77 acres of 'kumki' land in R.S. No.107/1A 1A of the same village ('kumki' lands are those lands over which the 'wargh' holder has a preferential right for assignment). ... However, the contention of the petitioners is that there was no warrant for disputing the presence of the predecessor-in-interest of respondents 5 to 7 in the kumki lands since the 'wargh' land owners had permitted the construction of a hom....
A kumkidar is necessarily either the registered holder, walawargdar or mulgenidar of the land to which the kumki privilege is attached". ... A kumki land is described thus: "kumki land is government waste land within 100 yards of assessed land included in a holding formed prior to fasli 1276. Kumkidar is a person who is entitled to enjoy the kumki privilege. ... ... ( 3 ) THE description of kumkidar referred to ab....
The very premise on which the plaintiffs seeking their right is in the nature of declaration that the 'B' schedule property is a kumki land attached to the 'A' schedule property and the plaintiffs having privilege right over the same and thereby injunct the respondents from interfering with the possession ... The defendant No.1 has no right over the kumki privilege of the plaintiffs are interfering with the peaceful possession of the kumki privilege of the plaintiffs ....
Hence, they are in absolute possession of 'X' schedule land - 6 - and are enjoying the entire 'X' schedule land since 40 years, as of right openly without interruption ... The first defendant is an old age man who is helping the 2nd defendant in all her activities, they have no right whatsoever over the 'X' schedule land. ... Defendant No.2 claiming to be the family member of the landlord, started to pose her wicked eyes over kumki land. ... As per Ex.P18....
is termed as “kumki” privilege and the land was claimed as “kumki” lands. ... The claim with respect to 1.05 Acres of land lying adjacent to the aforesaid property was that the holder of the 40 cents of land could exercise the privilege to use the said land for the beneficial enjoyment of the 40 cents for; cutting of trees and obtaining green manure for cultivation, which privilege ... Kammaran Manayani (supra) is not applicable to this case except for the fact that....
The case of the plaintiff is that the income from the family property was utilised for acquiring the same. The decisions relied on by the learned counsel for the first defendant did not consider the right of a Kartha or Karanavan who obtains assignment of kumki land belonging to the family. According to defendants 1.2 and 4 items 2 and 3 in 'X' schedule were obtained by first defendant and item No.l was obtained by the 3rd defendant. The first claim is that Ext.X-1 items 1 to 3 in the written statement of defendants 1.2 and 4 are not partible. Admittedly the property in question wa....
In that view of the matter, it is reasonable to hold that the owners of the Kadeem Varg lands have no right to lease out the Kumki lands which are still Government lands subject to certain privileges being enjoyed by the Kadeem holders. If the kumki land is assigned on Darkhast, then only the grantee will acquire ownership ever the kumki lands because on assignment of the kumki land on darkhast, such land would cease to be the kumki land. The fact that such owners enjoy certain privileges does not confer upon them any title over the kumki lands. The kadeem vargdar will have....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
