Dismissed

B Narayana Bhat v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC19 Jun 2012WA/2699/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka in a writ appeal dismissed the challenge against a Land Tribunal order granting occupancy rights after 26 years. The court held that the appellant's brother, as legal representative of the deceased father, had no objection and emphasized the delay in approaching the court.

What did the court decide?

The appeal filed under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act was dismissed.

B Narayana Bhat Vs the State of Karnataka — Property and Title | Karnataka HC (2012)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

¶3

DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2012

¶4

P R E S E N T

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. L. MANJUNATH

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. SURI APPA RAO

¶8

W.A.No. 2699 of 2011(L-RES)

¶9

BETWEEN :

¶10

B. NARAYANA BHAT, S/O. B. VENKATARAMANA BHAT, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, R/AT. SANKABITHILU HOUSE, DODDATHOTA D.K.

¶11

... APPELLANT

¶12

(By Sri. D. KRISHNA MOORTHY, ADV.)

¶13

AND

¶14

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, M.S.BUILDING, BANGALORE, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶15

THE LAND TRIBUNAL SULLIA TALUK, D.K. REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN.

¶16

KHATHIJAMMA, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS

¶17

ISAMMA, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS

¶18

¶19

ASIYAMMA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS

¶20

RESPONDENTS 3 TO 5 ARE D/O. LATE SHAIK BEARY, R/AT. MEGINAMANE, NARINGANA VILLAGE AND HOUSE THOREDUGOLI POST, BANTWAL TALUK, D.K.

¶21

MARIYAMMA, W/O. LATE MOHAMMED, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS

¶22

KHATIJAMMA, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS

¶23

SHEKABBA, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS

¶24

SAIDABHANU AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS

¶25

AYISHABHANU, AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS,

¶26

ABDUL RAHIMANA AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS. RESPONDENTS 7 TO 11 ARE THE CHILDREN OF LATE MOHAMMED, RESPONDENTS 6 TO 11 ARE R/AT. NEKKARE HOUSE, MANJANADY POST, MANGALORE TALUK, D.K.

¶27

SMT. SHRIDEVI, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, W/O. GOVINDA BHAT, R/AT. DODDATHOTA, AMARAMUDNOOR VILLAGE, SULLIA TALUK, D.K.

¶28

... RESPONDENTS

¶29

¶30

(By Sri. M.. KESHAVA REDDY, AGA FOR R.1 AND R.2, SRI. K. G. DAYANANDA, ADV. FOR PROPOSED R.12, SERVICE OF NOTICE H/S IN R/O. R.3-R.11, V.O. DATED 21.02.2012)

¶31

THIS WRIT APPEAL FILED UNDE SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED IN THE WRIT PETITION NO.39932/2010(LR-RES) DATED 18/01/2011.

¶32

This appeal coming on for Preliminary Hearing, this day, K. L. MANJUNATH J , delivered the following:

¶33

J U D G M E N T

¶34

The legality and correctness of the order dated 18.01.2011 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.29932/2010 is called in question in this appeal.

¶35

According to the appellant his father B. Venkatramana

¶36

Bhat was the owner of the land in Sy. No. 204/4 of Amara Mudnoor Village, Sullia Taluk, D.K. Late Shaik Beary had filed an application in Form No.7 for grant of occupancy rights in respect of 12 cents of land. The brother of the appellant B. Shivarama Bhat was conducting the case on behalf of the father after the death of father of the appellant, the brother of the appellant continued to appear as a legal

¶37

¶38

representative and ultimately he filed a memo stating that he has no objection to grant occupancy rights in favour of the applicant Shaik Beary in respect of 12 cents of land. Accordingly the order was passed on 09.03.1984. The said order was questioned by the appellant by filing writ petition no.39932/2010 on the ground that after the death of his father he was not heard in the matter and Shaik Beary was a tenant of the land. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition by holding that brother of the appellant Sri Shivaram Bhat was in charge of the case and notice issued to the L.Rs after the death of father of the appellant and Sri Shivaram Bhat being son of late B. Venkataramana Bhat had no objection for granting occupancy rights in favour of Shaik Beary. Therefore the learned Judge has come to the conclusion that no error is committed by the Land Tribunal in granting occupancy rights. This order is challenged in this appeal.

¶39

¶40

Having heard the learned Counsel for the parties, we

¶41

¶42

are of the view that the learned Single Judge has not committed any error in dismissing the writ petition for the following reasons:

¶43

At the outset we have perused the order sheet maintained by the Land Tribunal from the records produced by learned Government Advocate. It discloses that Sri Shivaram Bhat, brother of the appellant had appeared before the Tribunal and the order sheet maintained by the Tribunal is signed by him and he has filed a memo stating that he has no objection to grant occupancy rights in favour of Shaik Beary which memo is available in the original record. These facts are not disputed. If the appellant's brother as a representative of entire family after the death of their father had filed a memo stating that he had no objection for granting occupancy rights , the appellant cannot question the order passed by the Land Tribunal in 2010 after lapse of 26 years thereafter. Therefore, the order passed by the learned Single Judge has to be confirmed on the ground of

¶44

¶45

delay land latches in approaching this Court and justifying the order of the Land Tribunal based on the no objection given by the brother of the appellant.

¶46

Accordingly the appeal is dismissed.

¶47

Sd/JUDGE

¶48

Sd/JUDGE

¶49

vb*

B Narayana Bhat v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

B Narayana Bhat v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Francis Herald Crasta Vs Smt Pushpalatha R Adyanthaya W/O H.R.Adyanthaya.

Sri R Ravindra Vs State of Karnataka

M/S. Karnataka State Financial Corporation Vs Sri. Harsha v Rai a

The Catholic Board of Education Vs Pholomena Pinto

Pundarik S/O Venkashetty Vs the State of Karnataka

P R Krishna Rao S/O P.V. Ramachandra, Vs the Regional Labour Commissioner