Disposed

Ravikiran M v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC5 Sept 2022WP/17500/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging an endorsement rejecting khata registration, the High Court held that an efficacious alternative remedy of appeal exists under Section 269 of the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayath Raj Act, 1993. The petition was dismissed as not maintainable for not exhausting this remedy.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of; liberty granted to file an appeal under Section 269 of the Act within four weeks.

Ravikiran M Vs State of Karnataka — Landlord and Tenant | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE Mr. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶6

WRIT PETITION No.17500/2022 (LB-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN :

¶8

RAVIKIRAN M., S/O LATE MELAPPA, AGED 49 YEARS, NO.2590/3, 2^ND CROSS, ONTIKOPPAL, V.V.MOHALLA, MYSORE – 570 002.

¶9

M. MALATHI, D/O MELAPPA, AGED 55 YEARS, NO.409, DODDAVAKKALEGERI, MYSORE TALUK – 570 002.

¶10

...PETITIONERS

¶11

(BY SRI.RAGHU PRASAD B.S., ADV., AND SMT.RASHMI SAGAR K., ADV.,)

¶12

AND :

¶13

STATE OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, VIKAS SOUDHA, BANGALORE – 560 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY.

¶14

BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, TALUK PANCHAYATH, H.D.KOTE, MYSORE DISTRICT – 570 002.

¶15

¶16

HOMMARAGALLI GRAM PANCHAYATH, HOMMARAGALLI, H.D.KOTE, MYSORE DISTRICT – 570 002. REPRESENTED BY ITS PDO.

¶17

...RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI.SRINIVAS GOWDA, AGA)

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT DATED 08.04.2022 HEREWITH PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-E ISSUED BY THE R3; DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO TRANSFER THE KATHA OF THE PROPERTY TO THE JOINT NAMES OF THE PETITIONERS IN THE REGISTER MAINTAINED WITH THEM AND ETC.,

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

ORDER

¶22

This writ petition is filed against the

¶23

endorsement dated 08.04.2022 issued by the third respondent refusing to register the khata in favour of the petitioner is respect of the subject property.

¶24

Against the said endorsement, an

¶25

efficacious alternate remedy of appeal is provided under Section 269 of the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayath Raj Act, 1993. Hence, the present petition

¶26

¶27

filed without exhausting the alternative remedy of appeal provided under Section 269 of the Act is not maintainable.

¶28

Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of reserving liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal under Section 269 of the Act before the Executive Officer, Taluk Panchayat and if such an appeal is filed within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order, the Appellate Authority to consider the appeal on merits without going into the question of delay.

¶29

All contentions are kept open

¶30

Sd/JUDGE

¶31

RKA

Ravikiran M v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravikiran M v. 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

Suraj Kumar Jain Vs Department of Town and Country Planning

Mr Jaya Moolya Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Laxmi Vs the Mangaluru City Corporation

Savitha S Vs the Commissioner

Sri Sharath Shetty Vs the Municipal Commissioner

H Basavarajaiah Vs the Davanagere City Corporation