Allowed

Sri. Krishnappa v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC22 Jul 2022WP/57294/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Challenging an endorsement refusing to issue a land title deed, the High Court of Karnataka held the Tahasildar bound to comply with the Assistant Commissioner's grant order under Section 77-A, directing issuance of the deed within three months after purchase price collection.

What did the court decide?

Tahasildar directed to issue title deed within 3 months and comply with registration requirements under Section 77-A(2).

Sri. Krishnappa Vs the State of Karnataka — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF JULY, 2022

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA

¶6

WRIT PETITION No.57294/2016 (LR)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI. KRISHNAPPA S/O. LATE APPAYANNA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/AT MUTHUGADAHALLI VILLAGE, HESARAGHATTA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH (ADDL) TALUK.

¶9

… PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI.H.P.LEELADHAR, ADV.)

¶11

AND:

¶12

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, M.S. OFFICE BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE-560 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

¶13

2 . THE TAHASILDAR BANGALORE NORTH (ADDL.) TALUK, YALAHANKA SATELLITE TOWN, YELAHANKA,

¶14

BANGALORE-560 064.

¶15

… RESPONDENTS

¶16

(BY SRI.C.N.MAHADESHWARAN, AGA)

¶17

¶18

THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT ISSUED BY THE R-2 DT: 1.10.2012 VIDE ANNEXURE-H AND ETC.

¶19

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

¶20

ORDER

¶21

In this writ petition, an endorsement issued by the Special Tahasildar refusing to issue Form No.10 on the ground that the land in question has been classified as “Grama Samudaya” land in the revenue records, is challenged.

¶22

It is not in dispute that the petitioner had sought for grant of land under Section 77-A of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 by filing an application in Form No.7A. It is also not in dispute that the said application filed in Form No.7A was accepted by the Assistant Commissioner and the land bearing Sy.No.2 measuring 0.25 guntas of Muthuguadahalli village, Hesaraghatta Hobli, Bengaluru North (Addl.) Taluk was ordered to be granted in favour of the petitioner.

¶23

¶24

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

¶25

this order has not been challenged by any person and has thus attained finality. He submits that in the light of an order of grant being made in favour of the petitioner, it became the statutory duty of the Tahasildar to abide by the said order and issue a title deed as required under the Karnataka Land Reforms Rules, 1974 (for short ‘the Rules’).

¶26

On the adjudication of an application filed in Form No.7A and an order being passed granting the land in favour of the petitioner, the petitioner becomes entitled to claim ownership over the said property.

¶27

Rule 26-C(5) of the Rules, which prescribes the procedure for grant of land by the Deputy Commissioner or the authorised officer under Section 77-A of the Act, reads as follows:

¶28

“Rule 26-C. Procedure for grant of land by the Deputy Commissioner or the

¶29

¶30

Officer authorised by the State Government under Secion 77-A. --

¶31

(1) XXX

¶32

(5) The Deputy Commissioner or the Officer authorised in this behalf shall after holding summary inquiry in the manner provided in Section 34 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 (Karnataka act 12 of 1964) grant land in accordance with Section 77-A and the Tahasildar shall issue title deed in Form No.11-CCC on payment of purchase price in accordance with Section 78.”

¶33

In the light of the clear obligation cast upon the Tahasildar to issue a title deed in Form No.11-CCC on payment of purchase price in accordance with Section 78 of the Act, the Tahasildar is bound to issue a title deed and cannot take the stand that the land was classified as a Grama Samudaya land and could not therefore be granted.

¶34

Further, the Tahasildar by virtue of being subordinate to the Assistant Commissioner, who was the

¶35

¶36

authorised officer to grant land, cannot sit in judgment over the order passed by a superior officer.

¶37

8. In view of the fact that the statute mandates that

¶38

the title deed be issued in Form No.11-CCC on payment of purchase price by the successful grantee, the Tahasildar shall, in accordance with Rule 26-C(5) of the Rules, issue a title deed in favour of the petitioner after collecting the purchase price as determined under Section 78 of the Act.

¶39

Thereafter, he shall also comply with the requirement of Section 77-A(2) of the Act, by which the provisions of sub-section (2-B) of Section 77 of the Act are adopted which requires the Tahasildar to forward a copy of the order granting the land to the concerned Sub-registrar, who is thereafter required to register the same.

¶40

¶41

The said exercise shall be undertaken and

¶42

completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

¶43

The writ petition is accordingly allowed .

¶44

SD/JUDGE

¶45

¶46

CT:AN

Sri. Krishnappa v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Krishnappa 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

Sri Jayaramu Vs the State of Karnataka

K M Aliyulla Khan, Since Presumed Dead by LRs Smt. Yasmiin Ali Khan Vs R Sarvesha Murthy

Smt Parvathamma Vs Special Tahasildar

Smt v M Sumithra Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Sri Padmanabha Shetty Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri M Krishnappa Vs the State of Karnataka