Narasing Rao Since Deceased vs The Land Tribunal And Ors
2024 Latest Caselaw 6763 Kant

Karnataka High Court

Narasing Rao Since Deceased vs The Land Tribunal And Ors on 7 March, 2024

Author: V Srishananda

Bench: V Srishananda

                                                  -1-
                                                          NC: 2024:KHC-K:2035
                                                           WP No. 207091 of 2017




                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

                                         KALABURAGI BENCH

                               DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024

                                               BEFORE
                              THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA
                           WRIT PETITION NO. 207091 OF 2017 (KLR-RR/SUR)
                      BETWEEN:

                            NARASING RAO
                            SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS.,

                      1.    SRI.MUKUND RAO
                            S/O NARASING RAO,
                            AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
                            OCC: AGRICULTURE,
                            R/O VILLAGE KANNEKOLLUR,
                            TQ: SHAHAPUR,
                            DIST: YADGIRI-585202.

                      2.    SRI.LAKSHAMAN RAO
                            S/O NARASING RAO,
                            AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
Digitally signed by         OCC: AGRICULTURE,
SHILPA R
TENIHALLI                   R/O VILLAGE KANNEKOLLUR,
Location: High              TQ: SHAHAPUR,
Court Of                    DIST: YADGIRI-585202.
Karnataka
                      3.    SRI.MANOHAR RAO
                            S/O NARASING RAO,
                            AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
                            OCC: AGRICULTURE,
                            R/O VILLAGE KANNEKOLLUR,
                            TQ: SHAHAPUR,
                            DIST: YADGIRI-585202.
                                                                   ...PETITIONERS
                      (BY SRI. SACHIN M. MAHAJAN, ADVOCATE)
                           -2-
                                NC: 2024:KHC-K:2035
                                  WP No. 207091 of 2017




AND:

1.   THE LAND TRIBUNAL SHAHAPUR,
     REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN,
     ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, YADGIRI,
     TQ: SHAHAPUR, DIST: YADGIRI-585202.

     DHARMANNA
     SINCE DECEASED THROUGH LRS.,

2)   THIPPANNA S/O DHARMANNA
     SINCE DECEASED THROUGH LRS.,

2a) SRI. DEVYA S/O THIPPANNA,
    AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
    R/O VILLAGE KANNEKOLLUR, TQ: SHAHAPUR,
    DIST: YADGIRI-585202.

2b) SRI.RAJU S/O THIPPANNA,
    AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS,
    OCC: AGRICULTURE,
    R/O VILLAGE KANNEKOLLUR,
    TQ: SHAHAPUR,
    DIST: YAGIRI-585202.

3    SRI.NARAYAN S/O DHARMANNA,
     AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
     OCC: AGRICULTURE,
     R/O VILLAGE KANNEKOLLUR,
     TQ: SHAHAPUR, DIST: YADGIRI-585202.

4.   SRI.CHANDRAMA S/O DHARMANNA,
     AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
     R/O VILLAGE KANNEKOLLUR,
     TQ: SHAHAPUR, DIST: YADGIRI-585202.

5.   SRI. SHANKARA S/O DAHRMANNA,
     AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
     R/O VILLAGE KANNEKOLLUR, TQ: SHAHAPUR,
     DIST: YADGIRI-585202.
                          -3-
                               NC: 2024:KHC-K:2035
                                 WP No. 207091 of 2017




6.   SRI.NAGAPPA S/O DHARMANNA,
     AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
     R/O VILLAGE KANNEKOLLUR,
     TQ: SHAHAPUR, DIST: YADGIRI-585202.

7.   SRI.THARU S/O DHARMANNA,
     AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
     R/O VILLAGE KANNEKOLLUR, TQ: SHAHAPUR,
     DIST: YADGIRI-585202.

     BHOJYA SINCE DECEASED THROUGH L.RS

8.   SMT. MALKAMMA W/O BHOJA
     AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
     R/O VILLAGE KANNEKOLLUR, TQ: SHAHAPUR,
     DIST: YADGIRI-585202.

9.   SMT.GANGIBAI W/O BHOJYA,
     AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE,
     R/O VILLAGE KANNEKOLLUR,
     TQ:SHAHAPUR, DIST: YADGIRI-585202.

10. SRI.RAMU S/O BHOJYA,
    AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
    OCC:AGRICULTURE,
    R/O VILLAGE KANNEKOLLUR,
    TQ: SHAHAPUR,
    DIST:YADGIRI-585202.

11. SRI.BHEEMANNA S/O BHOJYA,
    AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
    OCC:AGRICULTURE,
    R/O VILLAGE KANNEKOLLUR,
    TQ: SHAHAPUR, DIST:YADGIRI-585202.

12. SMT.HIRIBAI D/O BHOJYA,
    AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
    OCC:AGRICULTURE,
    R/O VILLAGE KANNEKOLLUR,
    TQ: SHAHAPUR, DIST: YADGIRI-585202.
                             -4-
                                  NC: 2024:KHC-K:2035
                                     WP No. 207091 of 2017




13. SRI.MANAPPA S/O BHOJYA
    AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
    OCC:AGRICULTURE,
    R/O VILLAGE KANNEKOLLUR,
    TQ:SHAHAPUR, DIST:YADGIRI-585202.

14. SMT.DEVIBAI D/O BHOJYA,
    AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
    OCC:AGRICULTURE,
    R/O VILLAGE KANNEKOLLUR,
    TQ:SHAHAPUR, DIST:YADGIRI-585202.
                                            ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. MAYA T. R, HCGPG FOR R1;
    SRI S.B. HANGARKI, ADVOCATE FOR
    C/R3 TO R6, R8 TO R10 AND R13;
    R2(A), R2(B), R7, R11, R12, R14 ARE SERVED)

     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A ORDER
OR WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING
IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 10.08.2017 PASSED IN FILE
NO.LRF/140-3-12-38-39/1975-76 BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
VIDE ANNEXURE-E.

     THIS WRIT PETITION IS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:

                         ORDER

Heard Sri Sachin M.Mahajan, learned counsel for

petitioners and Sri S.B.Hangarki, learned counsel for

respondents.

2. Writ petition is with the following prayer :

"Praying to issue a order or writ in the nature of certiorari quashing impugned order

NC: 2024:KHC-K:2035

dated 10.08.2017 passed in File NoLRF/140-3- 12-38-39/1975-76 by the 1st respondent vide Annexure-E."

3. Facts in brief for disposal of the writ petition are

as under :-

Petitioners claiming to be the legal representatives of

one Narsingrao, filed Form No.7 before the Land Tribunal,

Shahapur stating that they are the tenants in occupation

of the land in Sy.Nos.99 and 101 of Kannekollur Village,

Shahapur Taluk, presently Yadgir District. They claimed

that they were tenants under one Pasoma Gulalmul

Lalmani.

4. Rival claimants claimed that Dharmanna and

Bhojya were protected tenants and Narsingrao being the

'Kulkarni', created revenue entries in his name taking note

of the fact that the original landlord namely Md.Masal

Uddin had been to Pakistan and thereby claiming that they

are the tenants.

NC: 2024:KHC-K:2035

5. When there is a rival claim, Tribunal is bound to

hold an enquiry in a proper manner and find out from the

material on record as to who is the original owner and

whether as on the date of promulgation of Karnataka Land

Reforms Act, who occupied the premises as a tenant in the

revenue records and thereafter pass appropriate orders.

6. In respect of Form No.7 filed by the writ

petitioners, there were several orders passed and each

time the matter has come before this Court and it was

remanded to the Tribunal for fresh disposal in accordance

with law. Even after remand by this Court in the earlier

writ petition, the Land Tribunal without considering the

reasons assigned by this Court while remitting the matter

to the trial Curt for fresh disposal in accordance with law

again passed the order at Annexure-E.

7. Being aggrieved by the same, writ petitioners

are before this Court.

NC: 2024:KHC-K:2035

8. Sri Sachin M.Mahajan, learned counsel for the

petitioners reiterating the writ grounds urged in the writ

petition and sought for allowing the writ petition.

9. Per contra, Sri S.B.Hangarki, learned counsel

representing for the rival claimants and learned High Court

Government Pleader for respondent No.1/State supported

the impugned order.

10. Having heard the parties in detail, this court

perused the material on record meticulously. On such

perusal of the material on record, it is crystal clear that

the Tribunal again failed to consider the rival contentions

in a proper manner. The order at Annexure-E is nothing

but reiteration of the contentions urged on behalf of the

parties and there is no specific finding recorded by the

Land Tribunal in Annexure-E.

11. No doubt, learned Tribunal has placed reliance

on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of

State of Karnataka and another vs. Uppegouda and

NC: 2024:KHC-K:2035

others1 and has recorded a finding that there may be a

possibility of wrong entries in the ROR extract. How and

when these wrong entries have been made by whom,

there is no finding in the order of the Tribunal at

Annexure-E. Mere stating the contentions of the parties

and referring the few judgments of this Court and the

Hon'ble Apex Court would not per se discharge the

responsibility of the Land Tribunal in recording a proper

finding that too when there is a rival claim. Therefore, the

order is at Annexure-E is to be held as illegal and same

needs to be quashed and a case has been made out for

remitting the matter to the Land Tribunal for fresh disposal

in accordance with law. Accordingly, following order is

made :

ORDER

i) Writ petition is allowed.

ii) Annexure-E dated 10.08.2017 passed by first respondent is quashed.

(1997) 3 SCC 593

NC: 2024:KHC-K:2035

iii) Matter is remitted to the Land Tribunal for fresh disposal in accordance with law especially having regard to the scope of the enquiry when there is a rival claim in respect of the one and the same land.

Sd/-

JUDGE

SN CT:SI