Sri J V Somashekhar vs Sri Sonnegowda
2022 Latest Caselaw 12287 Kant

                           1

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2022

                       PRESENT

             THE HON'BLE MR. ALOK ARADHE
                 ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

                          AND

      THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY

                 W.A.No.625/2022(LR)

BETWEEN:

SRI J.V.SOMASHEKHAR
S/O VENKATASWAMAPPA
AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS
R/AT M.S. PALYA
VIDYARANYAPURA POST
BANGALORE - 560 097.                   ...APPELLANT

(BY SRI ASHOK HARNAHALLI, SR. COUNSEL FOR
    SRI HARIKRISHNA S. HOLLA, ADV.)

AND:

1.      SRI SONNEGOWDA
        S/O LATE B.S. NARAYANAGOWDA
        AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS

(a)     SMT. RADHA
        W/O LATE SONNEGOWDA
        AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS.


(b)     MR JEEVAN
        S/O LATE SONNEGOWDA
        AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS.

(c)     MS. NUTHAN
        D/O LATE SONNEGOWDA
        AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS.
                            2


     ALL ARE RESIDING AT NO. 4463
     DODDABETTAHALLI VILLAGE
     YELAHANKA HOBLI
     VIDYARANYAPURAM
     BANGALORE- 560 097.

2.   SMT. RAJAMMA
     W/O LATE B.S. NARAYANAGOWDA
     AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS.

3.   SRI NAGANNA
     S/O LATE B.S. NARAYANAGOWDA
     AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS.

4.   SRI CHANDRU
     S/O LATE B.S. NARAYANAGOWDA
     AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS.

     ALL ARE RESIDING AT NO. 4463
     DODDABETTAHALLI VILLAGE
     YELAHANKA HOBLI
     VIDYARANYAPURAM
     BANGALORE - 560 097.

5.   THE LAND TRIBUNAL
     BANGALORE NORTH DISTRICT
     REP. BY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER.

6.   STATE OF KARNATAKA
     DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
     VIDHANA SOUDHA
     DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
     BANGALORE - 560 001.

7.   THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR
     BANGALORE NORTH TALUK.            ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI VIKRAM HUILGOL, SR. COUNSEL FOR
    SRI S. RAMAMURTHY, ADV FOR C/R-3;
    SRI S.S. MAHENDRA, AGA FOR R-5 TO R-7)

     THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDER DATED 03.06.2022 PASSED IN WRIT PETITION
NO.11526/2020 C/W W.P.NO. 11441/2020.
                               3

     THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
THIS DAY, VISHWAJITH SHETTY J., DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:

                     JUDGMENT

This intra court appeal is filed by the unsuccessful

petitioner challenging the order dated 03.06.2022 passed

by the learned Single Judge of this Court in

W.P.No.11440/2020.

2. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties and

also perused the material on record.

3. Brief facts of the case leading to the filing of this

appeal are, the appellant herein who claims to be the

subsequent purchaser of the land in question which was

the subject matter of the grant order dated 17.12.1986

passed by the Land Tribunal, Bengaluru North Taluk, had

approached this Court in W.P.No.11440/2020 challenging

the aforesaid order dated 17.12.1986 passed by the Land

Tribunal, wherein the occupancy rights in respect of the

land bearing Sy. No.38 measuring 3 acres 4 1/2 guntas

was granted in favour of one Sri Narayana Gowda. The

said writ petition was heard by the learned Single Judge

of this Court along with W.P.No.11526/2020 having

regard to the similitude of facts involved in the petitions,

and by a common order dated 03.06.2022 both the writ

petitions were dismissed on the ground of delay and

latches. Being aggrieved by the same, this intra court

appeal is filed.

4. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the

appellant submits that the appellant who was a purchaser

of the land in question was not made a party before the

Land Tribunal and he was not heard in the matter before

passing the order. He submits that late Narayana Gowda

was not at all a tenant of the land in question and he was

not in possession and cultivation of the land in question

at any point of time. He submits that the learned Single

Judge without appreciating this aspect of the matter has

erred in dismissing the writ petition on the ground of

delay and latches even though proper explanation was

offered for the delay.

5. Per contra, learned Counsel for the respondents

have argued in support of the impugned order and have

prayed to dismiss the writ appeal.

6. The appellant who claims to be the purchaser of

the land in question which was the subject matter of

Form No.7 filed by late Narayana Gowda before the Land

Tribunal contends that the order passed by the Land

Tribunal was in violation of the principles of natural

justice as he was not heard in the matter even though he

had interest in the property. The material on record

would go to show that the appellant has purchased the

land in question much after the year 1986. Further,

subsequent to the order dated 17.12.1986, Sri Narayana

Gowda has filed O.S.No.1651/2012 for declaration of his

title in respect of the land in question and the appellant

herein was admittedly a party to the said suit. Even after

service of notice in the said suit, for a period of eight

years, he had not taken any steps to challenge the order

dated 17.12.1986 under which occupancy rights of the

land in question was granted to Sri Narayana Gowda and

based on the same, he had filed a suit O.S.No.1651/2012

for declaration of his title.

7. The learned Single Judge having appreciated the

aforesaid aspect of the matter, has dismissed the writ

petition on the ground of delay and latches. No

satisfactory explanation has been offered by the

appellant for the delay of eight years even after he came

to know about the order dated 17.12.1986 passed by the

Land Tribunal. Under the circumstances, we do not find

any irregularity or illegality in the order passed by the

learned Single Judge which calls for any interference by

this Court. Accordingly, we decline to entertain this writ

appeal and the same is dismissed.

Sd/-

ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

Sd/-

JUDGE

KK