Karnataka High Court
Sri. Periyappa vs The State Of Karnataka on 22 August, 2022
Bench: Acting Chief Justice, S Vishwajith Shetty
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF AUGUST 2022
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. ALOK ARADHE
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. VISHWAJITH SHETTY
W.A. NO.2279 OF 2019 (KLR-RR/SUR)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI. PERIYAPPA
SINCE DECEASED BY LR.
a) ANNIAPPA
SINCE DECEASED BY LR.
(i) SMT. CHINNAMMA
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
W/O SRI. ANNIAPPA.
(ii) SRI. HARISH
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS.
(iii) SRI. ANIL
AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS.
b) SRI. YELLAPPA
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS
S/O PERIYAPPA.
c) SRI. VENKATESH
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
S/O PERIYAPPA.
2
2. SRI. CHINNAPPA
SINCE DECEASED.
2(a) SMT. AMMAYYAMMA
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS
W/O LATE CHINNAPPA.
2(b) SRI. VENKATESH
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
S/O LATE CHINNAPPA.
2(c) SMT. KAVAMMA
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS
D/O LATE CHINNAPPA.
2(d) SMT. RENUKA
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
D/O LATE CHINNAPPA.
3. SRI. KAKAPPA
AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS
S/O SRI. MUNISWAMY.
4. SRI. KAVERAPPA
AGED ABOUT 84 YEARS
S/O SRI. MUNISWAMY.
5. SRI. CHIKKAKAVERAPPA
SINCE DEDEASED BY.
a) SMT. YELLAMMA
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS
W/O SRI. CHIKKAKAVERAPPA.
b) SRI. RAJAPPA
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS.
c) SRI. SHIVA
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS.
(b) AND (c) SONS OF CHIKKAKAVERAPPA.
3
6. SRI. KRISHNAPPA
SINCE DECEASED BY LRS.
a) SMT. SHARADAMMA
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS
W/O SRI. KRISHNAPPA.
b) SMT. SHAKUNTALA
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS.
c) SMT. BHAGYA
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS.
d) SMT. MANJULA
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS.
e) SMT. PUSHPA
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS.
f) SMT. NETRA
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS.
g) SMT. SAVITHA
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS.
APPELLANTS NO.6(a) TO (g)
ARE DAUGHTERS OF SRI. KRISHNAPPA.
h) SRI. SANTHOSH
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS
S/O SRI. KRISHNAPPA.
7. SRI. M. NAGARAJU
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS
S/O SRI. MUNISWAMY
SINCE DECEASED BY LRS.
7(a) SMT. SAMPANGAMMA
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
W/O LATE M. NAGARAJA.
4
7(b) SRI. N.S. VIJAYA BHASKAR
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
S/O LATE M. NAGARAJA.
7(c) SRI. N.S. DIWAKAR HEGDE
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
S/O LATE M. NAGARAJA.
7(d) SRI. N.S. SUDHAKAR HEGDE
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
S/O LATE M. NAGARAJA.
7(a) TO (d) ARE R/AT. NO.18
THUBRAHALLI VILLAGE
WHITEFIELD MAIN ROAD
RAMAGONDANAHALLI POST
BANGALORE-560066.
APPELLANTS ARE R/AT.
RAMASAGARA VILLAGE
MUTHANALLUR POST
ATTIBLEHOBLI, ATTIBELE TALUK
BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT-560099.
... APPELLANTS
(BY MR. Y.V. PRAKASH, ADV., FOR
MR. Y.K. NARAYKANA SHARMA, ADV.,
AND ALSO FOR LRS OF DECD. APPL. NO.7)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
REVENUE DEPARTMENT
M.S. BUILDING, BANGALORE-560001.
2. THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
EAST TALUK AND ANEKAL TALUK
JIGANI HOBLI
BENGALURU DISTRICT-562106.
5
3. THE TAHSILDAR
ANEKAL TALUK
BENGALURU DISTRICT-562106.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY MR. S.S. MAHENDRA, AGA FOR R1-R3)
---
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO PASS
NECESSARY ORDERS AND CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN
W.P.NO.47608/2011, AND RRT(A)/CR/311/2010-11 AND SET
ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 11.02.2019 PASSED IN
W.P.NO.47608/2011 C/W W.P.NO.46701-46702/2016 AND
W.P.NO.46703-46706/2016 BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT
OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE AND ORDER DATED
02.08.2011 IN CASE NO.RRT(A)/CR/311/2010-11 VIDE
"ANNEXURE-A" IN THE SAID W.P. BY ALLOWING THIS
APPEAL WITH COSTS OR PASS OTHER SUITABLE ORDERS
UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE.
THIS WRIT APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS
DAY, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
6
JUDGMENT
This intra court appeal has been filed against the
order dated 11.12.2019 passed by the learned Single
Judge, by which writ petition preferred by the
appellant has been dismissed.
2. Facts giving rise to filing of this appeal
briefly stated are that the Special Deputy
Commissioner initiated proceeding 136(3) of the
Karnataka Land Revenue Act by which one Kallappa
who is appellant No.3 was asked to substantiate with
regard to his title in respect of land measuring 3 acres
of Sy.No.487/P15 Mahanthalingapura Village, Hobli
Anekal Taluk, Bangalore Rural District. The
appellants appeared before the Deputy Commissioner,
but did not furnish any documents in support of their
title in respect of the aforesaid property. The Deputy
Commissioner therefore, by an order dated
02.08.2011 directing that the name of the State
Government be entered in the records in respect of
land in question. The writ petition was filed on behalf
of dead persons before the learned Single, the same
has been dismissed by the learned Single Judge. In
the aforesaid factual background, this appeal arises.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits
that due to inadvertence, the writ petition on behalf of
dead persons was filed before the learned Single
Judge. It is further submitted that the order passed
by Deputy Commissioner be supplied and the matter
be remitted to the Deputy Commissioner for decision
afresh in accordance with law.
4. We have considered the submissions made
by learned counsel for the appellant and have perused
the record. The learned Single Judge has recorded a
finding that the appellants have appeared in a
proceeding before the Deputy Commissioner, however,
did not file any documents in their support. At this
stage, the Deputy Commissioner is therefore, directed
that the name of the State Government be recorded in
the revenue records. It is relevant to note that the
proceedings before the Deputy Commissioner is a
summary proceeding and does not confer any title.
Needless to state that it will be open to the appellants
to establish their title by means of a civil suit, if so
advised in respect of the land in question. With the
aforesaid liberty, the writ appeal is disposed of.
Sd/-
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/-
JUDGE
SS
