Karnataka High Court
Sri. Chikkavenkatappa vs The State Of Karnataka on 11 February, 2022
Bench: R Devdas
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON' BLE MR.JUSTICE R. DEVDAS
WRIT PETITION NO.15112 OF 2021 (LR)
BETWEEN
SRI. CHIKKAVENKATAPPA
SON OF SEENAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS,
RESIDING AT RAMPURA VILLAGE,
BIDARAHALLI HOBLI,
BENGALURU EAST TALUK-560 049 ...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. CHANDRASHEKAR PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. K.N.PRASANNA, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP. BY ITS REVENUE SECRETARY,
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU-560 001.
2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
BENGALURU NORTH SUB-DIVISION,
KANDAYA BHAVAN,
K.G. ROAD,
BENGALURU-560 001.
3. THE TAHASILDAR (ADDITIONAL)
BENGALURU EAST TALUK,
2
K.R. PURAM,
BENGALURU-560 016 ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.A.R. SRINIVAS, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING
TO QUASH THE ORDER DTD 31.05.1996, PASSED IN LRF
(83) 350/1995-96 AND 385/1990-91 BY THE R-2 VIDE
ANNX-F AND CONSEQUENTLY SET-ASIDE JUDGEMENT
DTD 26.04.2019 PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA APPELLATE
TRIBUNAL (CH-1), BENGALURU IN APPEAL NO.657/2013
VIDE ANNX-G. AND ETC.,
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING IN 'B' GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
ORDER
R. DEVDAS J., (ORAL):
Learned AGA takes notice for all the
respondents.
2. The petitioner herein purchased 1 acre of land
in Sy.No.32/1 of Anagalapura Village, Bidarahalli
Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluk, under a registered sale
deed dated 11.01.1983. However, proceedings in
L.R.F.Nos.(83)350/1995-96 and 385/1990-91 were
initiated by the competent authority-Assistant
Commissioner, invoking the powers under Section 83
of The Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961, for
violation of Sections 79-A and 79-B of the Karnataka
Land Reforms Act. Though two proceedings are
shown, a common order was passed on 31.05.1996. It
is clear that the proceedings against the petitioner is
in No.385/1990-91. It is also clear from the order of
the Assistant Commissioner that although notice is
said to have been sent to the petitioner, it was not
served on him and he did not appear before the
Assistant Commissioner. Moreover, it is contended
that the proceedings were initiated belatedly after a
lapse of nearly 7 years from the date of the sale deed.
Nevertheless, when the petitioner came to know about
the orders passed by the Assistant Commissioner
belatedly, the petitioner filed an appeal in Appeal
No.657/2013 before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal
and the Tribunal dismissed the appeal by order dated
26.04.2019, only on the ground of delay and laches.
3. It is seen from the judgment of the Tribunal,
that the petitioner herein had in fact produced the
RTCs standing in the name of his father and other
members of the family to support his contention that
the petitioner was an agriculturist and therefore, there
was no violation of the provisions of the Act.
Nevertheless, since the Tribunal dismissed the appeal
only on the ground of delay and laches, opportunity is
required to be given to the petitioner to contest the
matter on merits.
4. Consequently, this Court proceeds to pass the
following:
ORDER
1. The writ petition is allowed in part.
2. The impugned orders dated 31.05.1996
passed by the Assistant Commissioner in
LRF (83) 385/1990-91 and judgment dated
26.04.2019 in Appeal No.657/13 passed by
the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, are
hereby quashed and set aside.
3. The matter is remitted back to the second
respondent-Assistant Commissioner to
consider the case of the petitioner including
the consequences of the subsequent
amendment brought to the provisions of
Sections 79-A and 78-B of the Karnataka
Land Reforms Act in Karnataka Amendment
No.56 of 2020.
4. The petitioner shall appear before the first
respondent-Assistant Commissioner on 3rd
March 2022, without waiting for further
notice from the Assistant Commissioner.
Learned AGA is permitted to file memo of
appearance within a period of four weeks from today.
Sd/-
JUDGE
JT/-
