Karnataka High Court
The Deputy Commissioner Of vs M N Kapanappa on 29 March, 2022
Bench: P.S.Dinesh Kumar, M G Uma
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF MARCH, 2022
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S. DINESH KUMAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M.G. UMA
REVIEW PETITION No.1012 OF 2012
IN
WRIT APPEAL No.2442 OF 2007 (KLR)
BETWEEN:
THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF
KODAGU DISTRICT
MADIKERI ... PETITIONER
[BY SHRI. ARUNA SHYAM AAG A/W
SHRI. VENKATASATYANARAYANA, AGA]
AND:
1. M.N. KAPANAPPA
S/O SRI. NANJAPPA
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
R/A MULUSOGE VILLAGE
(KUSHALNAGAR TOWN)
KODAGU DISTRICT
SINCE DECEASED BY LRS
A) SUSHEELA
W/O SRI. LATE KAPANAPPA
MULUSOGE VILLAGE
KUSHALNAGAR HOBLI
SOMWARPETE TALUK
B) M.K. DHANARAJ
S/O SRI. LATE KAPANAPPA
MULUSOGE VILLAGE
-2-
KUSHALNAGAR HOBLI
SOMWARPETE TALUK
C) M.K. DHANALAKSHMI
D/O SRI. LATE KAPANAPPA
MULUSOGE VILLAGE
KUSHALNAGAR HOBLI
SOMWARPETE TALUK
2. M.N. BASAPPA
S/O SRI. NANJAPPA
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
R/A MULUSOGE VILLAGE
(KUSHALNAGAR TOWN)
KODAGU DISTRICT
3. M.N. BOGAPA
S/O SRI. NANJAPPA
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS
R/A MULUSOGE VILLAGE
(KUSHALNAGAR TOWN)
KODAGU DISTRICT
4. M.N. MANJUNATH
S/O SRI. NANJAPPA
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS
R/A MULUSOGE VILLAGE
(KUSHALNAGAR TOWN)
KODAGU DISTRICT
SINCE DECEASED BY LRS.
A) SMT. SUSHEELA
W/O SRI. M.N. MANJUNATH
AGED 50 YEARS
B) VANITHA
D/O SRI. M.N. MANJUNATH
AGED 21 YEARS
c) RAGHU
S/O SRI. M.N. MANJUNATH
AGED 50 YEARS
-3-
ALL ARE RESIDING AT
MULLUSOGE VILLAGE
KUSHALNAGAR HOBLI
SOMWARPETE TALUK
KODAGU DISTRICT
5. M.N. CHANDRASHEKAR
S/O SRI. NANJAPPA
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
R/A MULUSOGE VILLAGE
(KUSHALNAGAR TOWN)
KODAGU DISTRICT ... RESPONDENTS
[BY SHRI. M. SADASHIVA MURTHY, ADVOCATE
FOR R1(A)(C), R2, R3, R4(A-C) & R5;
SHRI. PHANIRAJ KASHYAP, ADVOCATE FOR R1(B)]
---
THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 &
3 OF CPC, PRAYING TO REVIEW THE ORDER DATED 25.01.2010
PASSED IN W.A. NO.2442/2007 (KLR) ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE.
THIS REVIEW PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION,
THIS DAY, P.S.DINESH KUMAR J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
State Government have presented this review
petition challenging the judgment and order dated January
25, 2010 passed in W.A. No.2442/2007.
2. Shri Arun Shyam, learned Additional Advocate
General submitted that land in question was acquired by
the Government some time in the year 1955. In support
of this contention, he sought to place reliance on
Annexure-A1, a Gazette Notification issued under Section
4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in respect of Survey
Nos.80 & 81, in all measuring 1.51 acres. He submitted
that land measuring 1 acre 51 cents has been notified and
thus, the land belongs to the Government.
3. Shri M.Sadashiva Murthy and Shri Phaniraj
Kashyap, learned advocates for the respondents argued
opposing the review petition.
4. Undisputed facts of the case are, the Deputy
Commissioner transferred the property in favour of the
Police Department for parade ground vide order dated
04.04.2001. Respondents herein have challenged the
same in W.P.No.17534/2002 on the premise that property
belonged to them. The Hon'ble Single Judge has allowed
the writ petition and quashed the order passed by the
Deputy Commissioner. Feeling aggrieved, State preferred
W.A.No.2442/2007 and the same has been dismissed.
5. As on date, the State have not produced any
document to substantiate their contention that property in
question was acquired except placing reliance on
Annexure-A, Preliminary Notification.
6. Learned AAG also submitted that land owner/
respondents have filed a suit seeking declaration in
O.S.No.120/2011 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Madikeri
and the same has been decreed. R.A.No.79/2012 by the
State has been dismissed. State Government have now
preferred a second appeal before this Court.
7. In view of the above, we find no error
apparent on the face of the record in the order dated
25.01.2010 passed in W.A.No.2442/2007 and this review
petition is accordingly dismissed.
No costs.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
Yn.
