Smt Jayamma vs The Joint Director Of Land Records
2022 Latest Caselaw 12680 Kant

                             1




       IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

        DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2022

                           BEFORE

         THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT

       WRIT PETITION NO.21263 OF 2022(KLR-RES)

BETWEEN:
SMT JAYAMMA
D/O LATE PUTTAIAH,
POST THEKKATTE VILLAGE, 576 231
KUNDAPURA TALUK
UDUPI DISTRICT
(SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED)
                                             ...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. CHANDRANATH ARIGA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS
   MYSURU DIVISION, MYSURU 570 001.

2. THE TECHNICAL ASSISTANT AND
   DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS,
   DEPUTY COMMISSIONER'S OFFICE,
   RAJATHADRI, MANIPAL-576 104.
   UDUPI.

3. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS,
   KUNDAPURA TALUK , KUNDAPURA 576 201.
   UDUPI DISTRICT.

4. SRI. RAJARAM SHETTY,
   S/O SADASHIVA SHETTY,
   AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,
                                2




  MELMANE, MALADY,
  POST THEKKATTE VILLAGE -576 231.
  KUNDAPURA TALUK,
  UDUPI DISTRICT.
                                          ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. R SRINIVASA GOWDA, AGA FOR R1-R3;
    NOTICE TO R4 -D/WITH V.C.O DATED 29/10/2022)

     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 &
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
ORDER    DTD   13.08.2021   PASSED   BY   THE    R3 IN
DISPUTE/ENQUIRY/RECORD/14/19-20 ANNEXURE-E AND QUASH
THE ORDER IN NO.TO.BUNI IN APPEAL NO.35/2021-22 DTD
14.09.2021 PASSED BY THE R2 ANNEXURE-F AND ETC.,

    THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                          ORDER

The grievance of the Petitioner is against impugned

orders dated 13.08.2021, 14.09.2021 & 23.08.2022

whereby his objection to phodi work in respect of the

subject land has been overruled and phodi work is being

accomplished on the basis of revenue records founded on a

registered Sale Deed dated 14.12.2017. Learned counsel

for the Petitioner vehemently argues that the Land Tribunal

order made under Section 48(A) of the Karnataka Land

Reforms Act, 1961 grants title to the subject land in favour

of his client and that could not have been damaged by a

subsequent Sale Deed obtained by someone and therefore,

the said Sale Deed ought not to have been acted upon by

the revenue authorities for accomplishing the phodi work.

2. Learned AGA on request having accepted notice

for the official Respondents, resists the writ petition by

making submission in justification of the impugned orders,

placing reliance on the decision of Apex Court in PREM

SINGH & ORS vs. BIRBAL, 2006(5) SCC 353 to the effect

that ordinarily the Revenue Authorities are to act upon the

registered conveyances. So contending, he seeks dismissal

of the writ petition.

3. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties

and having perused the petition papers, this Court declines

indulgence in the matter, broadly agreeing with the

submission made on behalf of the official Respondents. The

remedy of the Petitioner lies in a Civil suit, even otherwise

in the light of decision of Apex court in DHULABHAI vs

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH, AIR 1969 SC 78. The added

ground for declining indulgence is the availability of

alternate and equally efficacious remedy.

In the above circumstances, this writ petition is

disposed off reserving liberty to the Petitioner to avail the

remedy of civil suit if he so desires, in accordance with law.

However, to facilitate the availment of such a remedy, the

authorities are requested to halt the exercise for a period of

four weeks. This interim protection is granted keeping in

view of the decision in DIRECTOR DEFENCE R & D

LABORATORIES Vs. C PANDA, AIR 1977 AP 7.

The Registry shall send a copy of this judgment to the

private Respondents through speed post immediately.

Costs made easy.

Sd/-

JUDGE DS