Karnataka High Court
Sharad S/O Nagendra Patil vs Balachandrarao Chintamanrao ... on 3 August, 2023
Bench: S.R. Krishna Kumar, G Basavaraja
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:8259-DB
WA No. 100375 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF AUGUST, 2023
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
WRIT APPEAL NO. 100375 OF 2023 (KLR-RES)
BETWEEN:
SHARAD S/O. NAGENDRA PATIL,
AGE: 69 YEARS, OCC: SERVICE (RETD.),
R/O: D-2, 702, LAKE TOWN, CHS,
BIBWEWADI, PUNE-411 037.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI.S.B.HEBBALLI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. BALACHANDRARAO CHINTAMANRAO PATWARDHAN,
AGE: 66 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: 10A MANGALDAS ROAD, PUNE-411001,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SGPA HOLDER,
I.E. SHRI. MAHANTESH MAHADEV
NEELKANTHANAVAR, AGE: 48 YEARS,
OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: NO.2020,
MAHALAXMI NIVAS, INDIRANAGAR,
Digitally signed
by JAGADISH T R CHIKKODI-591 201.
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA 2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
Date: 2023.08.09
11:47:41 +0530 REPT. BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT,
M.S.BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU-560 001.
3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
BELGAVI-590 001.
4. THE TAHSILDHAR,
BELGAVI-590 001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. GIRIJA S.HIREMATH, HCGP FOR R2 TO R4;
R1-SERVED)
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:8259-DB
WA No. 100375 of 2023
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S.4 OF KARNATAKA HIGH
COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING THIS HON BLE COURT TO, SET ASIDE
THE ORDER DATED 25.04.2023 PASSED BY THE LSJ OF THIS COURT
IN W.P.NO.102637/2023 (KLR-RES) WHICH WAS ALLOWED AND
HAD DIRECTED THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES TO ENTER THE NAME
OF THE PETITIONER-RESPONDENT NO.1, BY DISMISSING THE SAID
WRIT PETITION.
THIS WRIT APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This intra-court appeal takes exception to the
impugned order dated 25.04.2023 passed in W.P.
No.102637/2023 whereby the said petition filed by
respondent No.1-writ petitioner was allowed by the
learned Single Judge.
2. The material on record discloses that, aggrieved
by the proceedings initiated by the Deputy Commissioner
under the provisions of the Urban Land Ceiling Act,
respondent No.1-writ petitioner preferred the aforesaid
petition. The said petition was contested by respondents
No.2 to 4 - State. After hearing the parties, the learned
Single Judge proceeded to pass the impugned order
NC: 2023:KHC-D:8259-DB
WA No. 100375 of 2023
allowing the petition, aggrieved by which the appellant is
before this Court by way of the present appeal.
3. In addition to reiterating various contentions
urged in the memorandum of appeal and referring to the
material on record, the learned counsel for the appellant
invites our attention to the additional documents produced
along with I.A. No.5/2023 in order to point out that the
appellant was proper and necessary party to the writ
petition since he had independent right, title, interest and
possession over the subject land and consequently, the
impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge
without impleading/arraying the appellant as a party or
hearing him is not only violative of principles of natural
justice but also contrary to the material on record and the
same deserves to be set aside.
4. Per contra, the learned High Court Government
Pleader would support the impugned order and submits
that there is no merit in the appeal and the same is liable
to be dismissed.
NC: 2023:KHC-D:8259-DB
WA No. 100375 of 2023
5. Respondent No.1-writ petitioner having been
served with the notice of this appeal has chosen to remain
unrepresented and has not contested the present appeal.
6. Insofar as I.A. No.5/2023 filed by the appellant
seeking permission to produce additional documents is
concerned, a perusal of the documents produced along
with I.A.No.5/2023 will indicate that the same are relevant
and material for the purpose of adjudication of not only
the present appeal but also the writ petition to which the
appellant ought to have been made a party before the
learned Single Judge proceeded to dispose of the petition.
As stated supra, the appellant claims independent right,
title, interest and possession over the subject land and he
was both a proper and necessary party to the writ petition.
Under these circumstances, in order to provide an
opportunity to the appellant to put forth his claim in the
writ petition and also to enable the learned Single Judge to
consider the matter afresh after hearing both the parties,
we deem it just and appropriate to allow I.A. No.5/2023
NC: 2023:KHC-D:8259-DB
WA No. 100375 of 2023
and consequently, set aside the impugned order and
remand the matter back to the learned Single Judge after
reconsideration afresh in accordance with law.
7. In the result, we pass the following:
ORDER
i) The appeal is hereby allowed.
ii) The impugned order is hereby set aside.
iii) The matter is remitted back to the learned single
Judge for reconsideration.
iv) The appellant is directed to be impleaded/arrayed
as respondent No.4 in the writ petition. Liberty is
reserved in favour of the appellant (respondent
No.4 to the writ petition) to file his statement of
objections along with documents.
v) I.A. No.5/2023 filed by appellant stands allowed
and the documents produced with the application
are received on record.
vi) Registry is directed to put up the application I.A.
No.5 in the writ petition for consideration by the
learned Single Judge.
NC: 2023:KHC-D:8259-DB
WA No. 100375 of 2023
vii) All rival claims between the appellants and
respondent No.1 as well as the respondents-State
are kept open and no opinion is expressed on the
merits of the case.
Pending I.A. No.3/2023 does not survive for
consideration and the same is disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
KMS
Ct:vh
