Dismissed

Ramesh S/O Malleshappa Talageri v. the Tahashildar

Karnataka HC6 Sept 2019WP/105609/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged an order posting a matter for orders in land revenue proceedings. Court dismissed the writ as premature, allowed petitioner to file written arguments, and directed the Tahasildar to expedite the proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner allowed to file written arguments; Tahasildar directed to expedite proceedings and pass orders; writ dismissed.

Ramesh S/O Malleshappa Talageri Vs the Tahashildar — Landlord and Tenant | Karnataka HC (2019)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶3

DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2019

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO.105609 OF 2018 (KLR-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN

¶8

RAMESH S/O MALLESHAPPA TALAGERI AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: NARAYANPUR ONIO, KAMLAPUR, DHARWAD.

¶9

... PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI.MALLIKARJUNSWAMY B.HIREMATH, SRI.P.S.BHAT, ADVS. )

¶11

AND

¶12

THE TAHASHILDAR DHARWAD.

¶13

RUDRAPPA S/O SHANKRAPPA KOMAR DESAI, AGED: 57 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: NARENDRA VILLAGE, TQ & DIST: DHARWAD.

¶14

SMT.SUNANDA W/O BASAVARAJ KOMAR DESAI AGED: 51 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: NARENDRA VILLAGE, TQ & DIST: DHARWAD.

¶15

SANGMESH S/O BASAVARAJ KOMAR DESAI AGED: 38 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: NARENDRA VILLAGE, TQ & DIST: DHARWAD.

¶16

¶17

RAJESHWARI D/O BASAVARAJ KOMAR DESAI AGED: 23 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: NARENDRA VILLAGE, TQ & DIST: DHARWAD.

¶18

SHEKHAPPA S/O SHANKRAPPA KOMAR DESAI AGED: 53 YEARS,OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: NARENDRA VILLAGE, TQ & DIST: DHARWAD.

¶19

GANGAPPA S/O SHANKRAPPA KOMAR DESAI AGED: 50 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: NARENDRA VILLAGE, TQ & DIST: DHARWAD.

¶20

SAHEBKHAN S/O ABDULGAFFAR KILLEDAR AGED 45 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE R/O KOPPADKERI, M.B.NAGAR, DHARWAD. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.V.S.KULKARNI, AGA FOR R1) (BY ARUN L.NEELOPANT AND SRI SRIHARSHA A. NEELOPANT, ADVS FOR R2 TO R7 ) (SRI.GANESH RAIBAGI, ADV.FOR R8)

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF PROHIBITION AGAINST THE 1ST RESPONDENT FROM HEARING THE PROCEEDINGS IN NO.RTD/CR/61/2018 WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-"L".

¶22

WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,

¶23

THE COURT, MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶24

¶25

ORDER

¶26

The petitioner had challenged the order at Annexure-‘L’ whereby the matter was posted for orders. It is notice that the application was filed by the petitioner under Sections 25 and 26 of Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, 1961, seeking for an opportunity to cross examine the Shabjan.

¶27

Learned AGA appearing for the respondent No.1-Tahasildar upon instructions submits that the matter has been posted for orders on the interim application filed. In view of the said submission question of adjudicating the contentions raised by the parties does not arise and the writ petition would be premature. In light of the submission upon instructions by respondent No.1 that the matter has been posted for orders on I.A. filed, petition is dismissed. The Tahasildar to pass orders on the said application filed by the petitioner in accordance with law.

¶28

¶29

Further it is to be noted that the counsel for

¶30

the petitioner submits that no written arguments has been filed on their side in the proceedings pending before the Tahasildar.

¶31

The petitioner is at liberty to file written arguments in support of said application within a weeks’ time from today. The first respondent to proceed to orders thereafter.

¶32

The Tahasildar to expedite the proceedings on the main matter that is pending and dispose off the same expeditiously within a period of not later than three months.

¶33

Sd/JUDGE

¶34

Hmb

Ramesh S/O Malleshappa Talageri v. the Tahashildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh S/O Malleshappa Talageri v. the Tahashildar

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

Mabusab S/O Jandisab Nadaf Vs the Managing Director

Shankar S/O. Vakude @ Gondhali Vs Shnehalata W/O Sachin Vakude @ Gondhali

M/S Renuka Fertilizers Vs Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board

Chandrahas Raddi S/O Narayana Raddi Vs P Sunilkumar

V. Nagappa S/O v. Mareppa Vs Vadde Lakshmamma W/O Late Vadde Mareppa

Sri.Suresh S/O Givind Kandekar Vs the State of Karnataka