Allowed

Smt K Leelavathi v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC8 Jun 2021WP/52071/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the High Court of Karnataka directed the second respondent, the Tahsildar, to issue a corrected Saguvali Chit in the petitioner's name, replacing that of her deceased mother-in-law, for the subject land.

What did the court decide?

Directed the second respondent to issue a corrected Saguvali Chit in the petitioner's name within four weeks.

Smt K Leelavathi Vs the State of Karnataka — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

DATED THIS THE 08^TH DAY OF JUNE 2021

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B. M. SHYAM PRASAD

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO. 52071/2017 (KLR/RES)

¶6

BETWEEN :

¶7

SMT K. LEELAVATHI W/O LATE PRABHAKAR RAO, ALIAS PRABHAKAR, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/O KURUBARA KARENA HALLI VILLAGE, BIDADI HOBLI, RAMANAGARAM TALUK AND DISTRICT - 571 511.

¶8

... PETITIONER

¶9

(By Sri. D. S. HOSMATH, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND :

¶11

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶12

THE THASILDAR RAMANAGARA TALUK, RAMANAGARA - 571 511.

¶13

... RESPONDENTS

¶14

(By SRI. A.R. SRINIVAS.,AGA)

¶15

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO ISSUE SAGUVALI CHIT IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER WITH REGARD TO THE LAND MEASURING 2 ACRES SITUATED AT BANNIKUPPE OF BIDADI HOBLI, BEARING SURVEY NO.68 AS PER GRANT ORDER VIDE NO. LND/SR/137/1991-92 DATED 05.07.1996.

¶17

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

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

The learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri A.R. Srinivas, the learned Additional Government Advocate, are heard for final disposal of the petition. The petitioner is aggrieved because the respondents in compliance with the directions of this Court in WP 38594/2011, which is disposed of on 22.3.2013, have issued Saguvali Chit for the land measuring 2 acres in Sy.No.68 of Bannikuppe village, Bidadi hobli, Ramanagara Taluk [the subject property] in favour of the petitioner's deceased mother-in-law. The petitioner seeks for annulment of this Saguvali Chit with a

¶20

¶21

direction to the respondents to issue a new saguvali chit in her name.

¶22

The learned counsel for the petitioner, relying upon the Official Memorandum dated 5.7.1996 as per Annexure- F, submits that the petitioner's husband, Sri Prabhakar Rao was granted the subject property and because the consequential Saguvali Chit was not issued during his lifetime despite repeated representations, the petitioner filed writ petition in WP 38594/2011 which is disposed of with a direction to the Tahsildar, Ramanagaram Taluk, Ramanagaram to issue Saguvali Chit. The second respondent did not issue the Saguvali Chit as directed by this Court and therefore the petitioner was constrained to initiate contempt proceedings in CCC No.3391/2013. The contempt proceeding is closed because it was submitted that there was compliance. But the Saguvali Chit is issued in the name of the petitioner's mother-in-law despite the

¶23

¶24

fact that the petitioner's mother-in-law has died way back in the year 1992 i..e, about 22 years prior to the issuance of the Saguvali Chit. The petitioner's husband Sri Prabhakar Rao @ Prabhakar is the only son and with the demise of her mother-in-law, the petitioner is entitled for saguvali chit in her name.

¶25

The facts as regards the grant and other circumstances are not disputed, and if these facts and circumstances remain undisputed, the petitioner would be entitled for Saguvali Chit in her name. Of course, if there could be any dispute either amongst the legal heirs of the deceased Prabhakar Rao @ Prabhakar (if any) or if there are any other claims, the Suguvalli Chit issued in the name of the petitioner will be subject to adjudication in that regard. Therefore, the following

¶26

ORDER

¶27

[a] The writ petition is disposed of directing the

¶28

second respondent – the Tahsildar, Ramanagaram

¶29

¶30

Taluk, to issue corrected Saguvali Chit for the subject land showing the petitioner’s name instead of the name of Smt. Neela Bai in the relevant columns.

¶31

[b] The petitioner is permitted to file a detailed representation enclosing a copy of this order and the original Saguvali Chit, if available with her, for such rectification. The petitioner shall submit such representation within four weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order.

¶32

[c] If such representation is made along with the original Saguvali Chit, the second respondent shall make necessary corrections and issue the Saguvali Chit within four weeks thereafter.

¶33

[d] If the original is not available with the petitioner for whatever reason, and the petitioner submits representation without the same, the second respondent shall issue fresh Saguvali Chit in the name

¶34

¶35

of the petitioner for the subject property endorsing that the earlier Saguvali Chit [as per Annexure-D] would be invalid, and such Saguvalli Chit shall also be issued within four weeks as aforesaid.

¶36

SD/JUDGE

¶37

Smt K Leelavathi v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt K Leelavathi 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M Narayana Vs M/S Snn Arjun Builders LLP

Smt Subbamma Vs M/S Snn Arjun Builders LLP

Shivakumar Vs the Assistant Commissioner

V.N. Balaji Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Krishnamurthy Vs the State of Karnataka

sri mudalagiriyappa Vs State of Karnataka