Karnataka High Court
Smt Ramakka vs Sri Seetharama Bhat on 3 September, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:35744-DB
WA No. 547 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
WRIT APPEAL NO. 547 OF 2022 (LR)
BETWEEN:
SMT. RAMAKKA
D/O LATE CHENNAMMA
AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS
R/AT. ALAPE VILLAGE
ALAPE POST, D.K. DISTRICT
MANGALURU-575 007
...APPELLANT
(BY Ms. ANANYA RAI, FOR
SRI. VISHWAJITH RAI M., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI. SEETHARAMA BHAT
S/O LATE SRI. KRISHNA BHAT
Digitally signed
DEAD BY HIS LR
by
CHANNEGOWDA
PREMA
Location: High
SRI. SRIDHAR
Court of
Karnataka
S/O LATE SRI. SEETHARAMA BHAT
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS
R/AT. ALAPE MATA
ALAPE VILLAGE, ALAPE POST
D.K. DISTRICT
MANGALURU-575 007
2. THE LAND TRIBUNAL
MANGALORE-07
DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT
BY ITS CHAIRMAN
...RESPONDENTS
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:35744-DB
WA No. 547 of 2022
(BY SRI. PRASHANTH CHANDRA S.N., ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SMT. NAMITHA MAHESH, AGA FOR R2)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER
DATED 30.05.2022 IN W.P.NO.4930/2012 (LR) PASSED BY THE
LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HON'BLE COURT AND
DISMISS THE SAID WRIT PETITION IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN)
Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellant as
well as learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.1
and learned Additional Government Advocate appearing
for the respondent No.2.
2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the
appellant that appellant was an illiterate lady and entry in
the Form No.7 filed by her claiming occupancy rights in
respect of 25 cents in Sy.No.4/3 of the Alape Village,
NC: 2024:KHC:35744-DB
Mangaluru Taluk was erroneous which occurred only on
account of her illiteracy. It is submitted that actual survey
number where she had occupancy rights is Sy.No.4/4 in
which, she claims occupancy rights over 30 cents of land.
It is submitted that site inspection conducted clearly found
that her claim was in Sy.No.4/4 and was well founded. It
is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that
she has no claims on 25 cents of land in Sy.No.4/3 as has
been stated in her Form No.7 application. It is submitted
that she has also filed an amendment to the Form No.7
application filed before the appropriate authority.
3. We have perused the files in respect of Form No.7
application. Though the learned counsel for the
respondent No.1 submits that there are two numbers
mentioned in the files, we notice that there appears to
have been a renumbering of the Land Tribunal proceedings
concerned and that there is only one Form No.7
application filed by the appellant herein. There is a report
of site inspection stating that the appellant was found in
NC: 2024:KHC:35744-DB
possession of the property in Sy.No.4/4 and also had a
house erected in the said property. Taking note of the
contentions of the parties and the records produced before
us, we also notice that there appears only one proceeding
and one Form No.7 application.
4. In view of the specific submission made by the
learned counsel for the appellant that there is only one
Form No.7 application and that appellant is confining her
claim to the 30 cents of land in Sy.No.4/4 and that she will
have no further claim in respect of any land in Sy.No.4/3,
we are of the opinion that the appeal is liable to be
allowed. Hence, we pass the following:-
ORDER
i. The appeal is hereby allowed.
ii. The order of the learned Single Judge is set
aside.
iii. The order of the Tribunal dated 07.10.2011
which is impugned before the learned
Single Judge shall stand upheld subject to
NC: 2024:KHC:35744-DB
the submission made by the learned
counsel for the appellant that the appellant
will have absolutely no rights in respect of
land bearing Sy.No.4/3 or any other lands.
iv. There will be a direction to the respondent
No.2 to issue necessary further steps in
respect of the impugned order passed by
the Land Tribunal in the proceedings
impugned before the learned Single Judge.
Sd/-
(ANU SIVARAMAN)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(G BASAVARAJA)
JUDGE
MH/-
