Karnataka High Court
Mrs. Chandravathi vs Dr K Ravindranath Shetty on 3 October, 2023
Bench: Chief Justice, Krishna S Dixit
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:35573-DB
WA No. 1135 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR PRASANNA B. VARALE, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT
WRIT APPEAL NO. 1135 OF 2022 (LR)
BETWEEN:
1. MRS. CHANDRAVATHI,
W/O LT ASHOK BONGERA,
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
R/AT SRI DEVI NILAYA,
OPP PADAVU GROUND,
BEJAJ POST, MANGALORE 575 004.
2. MRS. CHAMPA,
W/O SEETHARAM,
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
RA/T NEAR MALARAYA TEMPLE,
Digitally signed BANDIKOYTA, ULLAL,
by SHARADA MANGALORE TALUK.
VANI B
Location: HIGH 3. MRS. PARVATHI W/O MURALI,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS,
R/AT BINDU NILAYA,
SHARADA COLONY, MDOOR,
MANGALORE TALUK.
4. PURUSHOTHAM BANGERA,
S/O LATE BABU AMIN,
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
R/AT SRI DURGA GANESH,
OPP PADAVU HIGH SCHOOL GROUND,
BEJAJ POST, MANGALORE 4.
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:35573-DB
WA No. 1135 of 2022
5. SMT VEDAVATHI P BANGERA,
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,
W/O PURUSHOTHAM BANGERA,
RA/T SRI DURGA GANESH,
OPP PADAVU HIGH SCHOOL GROUND,
BEJAJ POST, MANGALORE 4.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. VIVEK HOLLA .,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. DR K RAVINDRANATH SHETTY,
S/O LT K SANJEEVA SHETTY,
R/O BANDASALE HOUSE,
KADANDALE VILLAGE,
KADANDALE POST, MANGALORE TQ.
2. SMT. RENUKA RAI,
W/O B THIMMAPPA RAI,
R/O BANDASALE HOUSE,
KADANDALE VILLAGE,
KADANDALE POST, MANGALORE TQ.
3. K SUBBAIAH SHETTY,
S/O LATE SANJEEVA SHETTY,
R/O BANDASALE HOUSE,
KADANDALE VILLAGE,
KADANDALE POST, MANGALORE TQ.
4. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REP BY ITS REVENUE SECRETARY,
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
DR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU 560 001.
5. THE LAND TRIBUNAL,
MANGALORE,
REP BY ITS CHAIRMAN.
6. MRS. RAMANI,
W/O KRISHNAPPA,
-3-
NC: 2023:KHC:35573-DB
WA No. 1135 of 2022
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS,
RESIDING AT URU NILAYA,
HOIGE BAZAR,
MANGALORE - 575 004.
7. MRS. JALAJA,
W/O SANJEEVA KARKERA,
R/AT DEVI NILAYA,
OPP PADAVU GROUND,
BEJAJ POST, MANGALORE 575 004.
8. MRS. YASHODHA,
W/O GANGAYA,
R/AT KODIMAHALL HOUSE, MORLA
BANTWAL TALUK.
9. MRS. KAMAKSHI,
W/O GANGADHAR KOTIAN,
R/AT SRI DEVI KRUPA,
OPP PADAVU HIGH SCHOOL GROUND,
BEJAJ POST, MANGALORE 4.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT.SHWETA KRISHNAPPA., AGA FOR R4)
THIS WRIT APPEAL FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE
SINGLE JUDGE DATED 23.05.2022 PASSED IN
W.P.No.21453/2009 AND GRANT SUCH OTHER AND FURTHER
RELIEFS IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, CHIEF JUSTICE DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-4-
NC: 2023:KHC:35573-DB
WA No. 1135 of 2022
JUDGMENT
This intra-court appeal seeks to lay a challenge to
the learned Single Judge's order dated 23.05.2022
whereby, private respondents' W.P.No.21453/2009
(LR-Sec 48A) having been favoured the Land Tribunal
order dated 30.06.1981 granting occupancy under Section
48A of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 has been
quashed and the matter had been remitted to the Tribunal
for consideration of the Application in Form 7 afresh.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants
vehemently argues that; the impugned order has been
made in a highly belated challenge to the Land Tribunal
order; there is no plausible explanation for the delay
brooked in the matter; even otherwise, when there was
one of the legal representatives of the deceased land lord
on record of the proceedings of the Land Tribunal, the
grant of occupancy could not have been set at naught
merely because other legal representatives were not
impleaded. Learned Additional Government Advocate
NC: 2023:KHC:35573-DB
WA No. 1135 of 2022
appears for the fourth respondent-State and fifth
respondent-Tribunal. She makes submission in justification
of the impugned order contending that when property
rights are involved, the Land Tribunal ought to have issued
notice to the LRs of the deceased land lord and in not
doing so there is violation of principles of natural justice.
So contending, she seeks dismissal of the appeal.
3. Having heard the learned counsel for the
appellants and the learned Additional Government
Advocate appearing for the officials respondents, we are
not inclined to grant indulgence in the matter inasmuch as
what has been done by the learned Single Judge is only a
remand on the ground of non-impleadment of necessary
parties namely, LRs of deceased land lord and consequent
violation of principles of natural justice. All contentions
have been kept open for being urged before the Land
Tribunal.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants
though vehemently argued about the long delay in filing
NC: 2023:KHC:35573-DB
WA No. 1135 of 2022
the writ petition, he is not in a position to demonstrate the
knowledge of the writ petitioners about the Land Tribunal
proceedings. Once knowledge/notice is not demonstrated,
the length of the time lost in laying a challenge to the
order granting occupancy, pales into insignificance. We
cannot lose sight of the constitutional guarantee to the
property rights under Article 300A. Added the principles of
natural justice are often treated as being part of Article 14
jurisprudence and therefore, the impugned order
sanctifying those principles cannot be interfered with.
In the above circumstances, the appeal being devoid
of merits is liable to be and accordingly dismissed.
Registry shall send a copy of this order to private
respondents by speed post immediately.
Sd/-
CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/-
JUDGE
Snb/
