Karnataka High Court
The State Of Karnataka vs L.M. Cheluvaraje Gowda on 4 January, 2021
Author: B.V.Nagarathna And Uma
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 04TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2021
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V.NAGARATHNA
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M.G. UMA
WRIT APPEAL No.3919/2019 (KLR-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY THE UNDER SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,
5TH FLOOR, M.S. BUILDING, 2ND STAGE,
DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
KARNATAKA.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
MANDYA DISTRICT,
KARNATAKA - 571 426.
3. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR
LAND SURVEY DIVISION
PANDAVAPURA SUB DIVISION,
PANDAVAPURA,
MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 434
KARNATAKA.
4. THE THASILDAR,
K.R. PETE TLAUK,
MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 426
MANDYA.
5. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS
MANDYA DIVISION
MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 426
KARNATAKA.
6. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS
PANDAVAPURA SUB DIVISION
PANAVAPURA
MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 426
KARNATAKA. ... APPELLANTS
-2-
(BY SRI C.N. MAHADESHWARAN, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT
ADVOCATE)
AND:
L.M. CHELUVARAJE GOWDA
S/O. MOGANNA GOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
RESIDING AT BANDABOYINAHALLI
KASABA HOBLI, V. MENSA POST,
K.R. PETE TALUK,
MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 426
KARNATAKA. ... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI SYED AKBAR PASHA, ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO a) ALLOW THE
WRIT APPEAL; b) SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 06/01/2017,
PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WRIT PETITION
NO.57761/2016.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
THIS DAY, NAGARATHNA J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-
JUDGMENT
There is a delay of 981 days in filing this appeal.
2. Learned Additional Government Advocate
submits that the direction issued by the learned single
Judge in W.P.No.57761/2016 on 06/01/2017 has been
complied with inasmuch as when proceedings to conduct
and effect durasthi of lands in question was taken up, it
was found that there was a dispute between parties vis-à-
vis the title to the land in question and there was an
endorsement issued to the respondent on 03/10/2017.
Therefore, in view of there being a compliance of the order
of the learned single Judge inasmuch as steps taken to
conduct the durasthi work has resulted in a title dispute
and subsequent legal proceedings, the writ appeal may be
accordingly disposed of.
3. The submission of learned Additional
Government Advocate is placed on record.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent does not
dispute the fact that the endorsement dated 03/10/2017
has been issued to the respondent/authorities.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent submits
that there are certain legal proceedings, which have been
initiated in respect of the land in question. Be that as it
may. We find that the learned single Judge has only
directed the authorities to conduct and effect durasthi of
the lands in question. When the said process was
commenced, it was found that there were rival title holders
in respect of the lands in question. Therefore, an
endorsement was issued by the authorities on 03/10/2017.
If any party is aggrieved by the said endorsement, it is for
that party to take recourse to legal action in accordance
with law. In view of the above, we do not find any reason
to keep this appeal pending. As such, the appeal is
disposed of by recording the submission of the learned
counsel for the respective parties.
In view of the disposal of the appeal in the aforesaid
terms, the pending applications also stand disposed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
S*
