Dismissed

Sri Abdul Quadar Mukka v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC22 Aug 2022WP/3078/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this 2-line hearing order, the Kerala High Court judge dismissed a writ petition regarding land title confirmation, rejecting an additional request to challenge a lower adjudication within the same proceedings and reserving liberty to do so later.

What did the court decide?

Request to challenge endorsement within writ proceedings rejected; liberty reserved to challenge endorsement by law.

Sri Abdul Quadar Mukka Vs State of Karnataka — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

WP No. 3078 of 2022

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF AUGUST, 2022

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 3078 OF 2022 (KLR-RES)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SRI ABDUL QUADAR MUKKA S/O HAMMABBA AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS AGRICULTURIST VALAGEREHALLI VILLAGE KENGERI HOBLI BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK BENGALURU 560 060

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. K. SREEDEHAR, ADVOCATE)

¶12

Digitally signed by JUANITA THEJESWINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

AND:

¶14

STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY ROOM NO.110 GATE II, M S BUILDING AMBEDKAR VEEDHI

¶15

BENGALURU 560 001

¶16

BRUAHT BENGALURU MAHANARA PALIKE REP BY ITS CHIEF COMMISSIONER N R SQUARE BENGALURU 560 002

¶17

TAHSILDAR BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK

¶18

¶19

WP No. 3078 of 2022

¶20

KANDAYA BHAVAN DISTRICT OFFICE ROAD AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU 560 009

¶21

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT K G ROAD NEAR DISTRICT REGISTRAR OFFICE AMBEDKAR VEEDHI SAMPANGI RAMA NAGARA BENGALURU 560 009

¶22

…RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SRI.VIJAY KUMAR A PATIL, AGA FOR R1, R3 & R4 SMT. SINCHANA M.R., ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶24

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R1 TO CONFIRM THE TITLE OF THE PETITIONER HEREIN AND ALSO PRESENT KHATA HOLDERS IN SY.NO.16 MEASURING 1 ACRE 20 GUNTAS AS STATED UNDER SCHEDULE A TO D AND ETC.,

¶25

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

¶26

ORDER

¶27

R.DEVDAS J., (ORAL):

¶28

On the last occasion, the learned Additional Government Advocate had furnished a copy of the endorsement dated 07.05.2022 given by the respondentTahsildar, Bangalore South Taluk and at the request of the learned Counsel for the petitioner, the matter was

¶29

¶30

WP No. 3078 of 2022

¶31

adjourned to this day to enable the learned Counsel for the petitioner to challenge the said endorsement. Learned

¶32

Counsel for the petitioner seeks for one more

¶33

accommodation.

¶34

The request made by the learned counsel to

¶35

permit the petitioner to challenge the endorsement dated 07.05.2022 in this writ proceedings is rejected.

¶36

Therefore, while dismissing this writ petition, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to raise a challenge to the endorsement dated 07.05.2022, in accordance with law.

¶37

Pending I.As., if any, stand disposed of.

¶38

Sd/JUDGE

¶39

Sri Abdul Quadar Mukka v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Abdul Quadar Mukka 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr M a Colasco Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. K. v. Shantharam Vs the State of Karnataka

Manjaiah Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Smt. Nagamma Vs the Secretary

Sri.v.Basavaraj Wodiyar Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Gangaraju Vs the State of Karnataka