Dismissed

Puttaswamegowda v. Land Tribunal

Karnataka HC20 Jun 2023WA/4720/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeal against Single Judge's dismissal of writ petitions challenging Land Tribunal order denying occupancy rights. Court rejected application for additional evidence as documents were post-reform period. Denied interference as no acceptable material provedClaimants' possession before 1.3.1974.

What did the court decide?

Writ appeal dismissed; application for production of additional documents rejected; High Court confirms Land Tribunal order.

Puttaswamegowda Vs Land Tribunal — Landlord and Tenant | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC:21192-DB WA No. 4720 of 2017

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2023

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE

¶7

AND

¶8

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

¶9

WRIT APPEAL NO. 4720 OF 2017 (LR)

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

PUTTASWAMEGOWDA , S/O PUTTAGOWDA,

¶12

AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,

¶13

KOTEGOWDA, S/O BEEREGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS

¶14

2(a) MAHADEVEGOWDA, S/O LATE KATEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS.

¶15

Digitally signed by BELUR RANGADHAMA NANDINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶16

2(b) SHIVANNA S/O LATE KATEGOWDA

¶17

AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS

¶18

BOTH ARE RESIDING AT KONGALLI VILLAGE, NANJANGUD TQ-571 301. HURA POST, MYSORE DISTRICT.

¶19

PUTTASWAMEGOWDA,

¶20

S/O BANNEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,

¶21

RANGAIAH @ PUTTARANGAIAH, S/O CHIKKARANGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS

¶22

SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS

¶23

4 (a) MARIDASAIAH,

¶24

- 2 - NC: 2023:KHC:21192-DB WA No. 4720 of 2017

¶25

S/O LATE RANGAIAH @ PUTTARANGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS.

¶26

4(b) PRASAD

¶27

S/O LATE RANGAIAH @ PUTTARANGAIAH AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, BOTH ARE RESIDING AT MELKUNDI VILLAGE, NANJANGUD TQ-571 301, HURA POST MYSORE DISTRICT.

¶28

SIDDEGOWDA S/O PAWADEGOWDA,MAJOR

¶29

HUCCHEGOWDA DEAD BY HIS LRS

¶30

6(b) BEEREGOWDA, S/O LATE HUCCHEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS.

¶31

ALL ARE R/O KONGAHALLI HURA POST, NANJANGUD TQ-571 301, MYSORE DISTRICT. APPELLANTS NO.2(a) AND 4(a) ARE NOT CLAIMING SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT.

¶32

…APPELLANTS

¶33

(BY SRI. S B HALLI, ADVOCATE)

¶34

AND:

¶35

LAND TRIBUNAL, NANJANGUD BY ITS SECRETARY, NANJANGUD TQ-571 301, MYSORE DISTRICT - 571301.

¶36

STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ITS SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPT M S BUILDING, DR AMBEDKAR BEEDI, BANGALORE-01.

¶37

SARVAJANIKA VIDYARTHI NILAYA, BY ITS SECRETARY, MYSORE.

¶38

PUTTESWAMEGOWDA, S/O MUGLIGOWDA, MAJOR.

¶39

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:21192-DB WA No. 4720 of 2017

¶40

5. OBALEGOWDA, S/O OBALEGOWDA, MAJOR.

¶41

4 AND 5 ARE R/O KONGALLI VILLAGE, HURA POST,NANJANAGUD TQ-571 301, MYSORE DISTRICT-571301.

¶42

SIDDEGOWDA, S/O KURIMADEGOWDA, SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS

¶43

(a) SHIVANNEGOWDA, S/O LATE SIDDEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/O MELKUNDI VILLAGE, NANJANGUD TQ, HURA POST - 571301 MYSORE DISTRICT.

¶44

DEBUR MADASHETTY, MAJOR, SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS

¶45

7(a) NINGA SHETTY, S/O LATE DEBUR MADASHETTY, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,

¶46

7(b) CHANNA SHETTY S/O LATE DEBUR MADASHETTY AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, BOTH ARE R/O MELKUNDI VILLAGE, NANJANGUD TQ, HURA POST, MYSORE DISTRICT-571 301.

¶47

8. NANJAPPA

¶48

S/O MALLAIAH, MAJOR.

¶49

SIDDEGOWDA S/O MARIGOWDA SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS

¶50

9(a) GURUVEGOWDA,

¶51

S/O LATE SIDDEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS.

¶52

- 4 - NC: 2023:KHC:21192-DB WA No. 4720 of 2017

¶53

9(b) MADEGOWDA, S/O LATE SIDDEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS.

¶54

9(c)BASAVEGOWDA, S/O LATE SIDDEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,

¶55

RESPONDENTS 9(a) to (c) ARE R/O MELKUNDI VILLAGE, NANJANGUD TQ, HURA POST, MYSORE DISTRICT-571 301.

¶56

ANJANEYA @ KARIYAIAH, S/O PUTTADASAIAH, SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS,

¶57

10(a) RANGARAM, S/O LATE ANJANEYA @ KARIYAIAH, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS.

¶58

10 (b) SADASHIVA, S/O LATE ANJANEYA @ KARIYAIAH, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, BOTH ARE R/O MELKUNDI VILLAGE, NANJANGUD TQ, HURA POST, MYSORE DISTRICT-571 301.

¶59

M SHIVAIAH SHETTY, S/O PUTTASHETTY, MAJOR.

¶60

PUTTAMADAPPA @ PONDAPPA, MAJOR, SINCE DECEASED BY LRS, 12(a) SMT RATHNAMMA, W/O LATE PUTTAMADAPPA, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS. R/O MELKUNDI VILLAGE, NANJANGUD TQ, HURA POST,MYSORE DISTRICT-571 301.

¶61

CHANNAGOWDA, S/O MADEGOWDA, MAJOR, SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS.

¶62

¶63

NC: 2023:KHC:21192-DB WA No. 4720 of 2017

¶64

13(a) MADEGOWDA, S/O LATE CHANNAGOWDA, MAJOR.

¶65

MADEGOWDA

¶66

S/O LATE CHANNAGOWDA, MAJOR

¶67

K MAHADEVASHETTY, S/O PUTTASHETTY, MAJOR, SINCE DECEASED. BY HIS LRS

¶68

15(a) BASAVASHETTY, S/O K MAHADEVASHETTY, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, R/O MELKUNDI VILLAGE, NANJANGUD TQ, HURA POST, MYSORE DISTRICT-571 301.

¶69

VEERABHADRAPPA @ KARIYAPPA, S/O NINGAPPA, MAJOR.

¶70

MADAIAH,

¶71

S/O BASAVAIAH, MAJOR, DEAD BY LR'S

¶72

17(a) SMT CHINNAMMA, W/O LATE MADAIAH, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/O MELKUNDI VILLAGE, NANJANGUD TQ, HURA POST-571 301. MYSORE DISTRICT.

¶73

MARIKYATHAIAH, S/O MARIERAIAH, MAJOR, SINCE DECASED BY HIS LRS,

¶74

18(a) MARIERAIAH, S/O LATE MARIKYATAIAH, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/O MELKUNDI VILLAGE, NANJANGUD TQ, HURA POST-571 301, MYSORE DISTRICT.

¶75

CHIKKANNA, S/O NINGAPPA,

¶76

- 6 - NC: 2023:KHC:21192-DB WA No. 4720 of 2017

¶77

SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS, 19(a) MAHADEVAPPA, S/O LATE CHIKKANNA, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,

¶78

19(b) CHINNASWAMAPPA, S/O LATE CHIKKANNA, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS.

¶79

19(c)SUNDARAPPA, S/O LATE CHIKKANNA, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS,

¶80

19(d) MURTHAPPA, S/O LATE CHIKKANNA, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS,

¶81

19(e) CHANNAPPA, S/O LATE CHIKKANNA, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS,

¶82

RESPONDENTS 19(a) to 19(e) ARE R/O MELKUNDI VILLAGE, NANJANGUD TQ, HURA POST, MYSORE DISTRICT-571 301.

20. SIDDEGOWDA

S/O GUNEGOWDA, MAJOR

21. CHIKKAMADESETTY

S/O MADASETTY, SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS

¶87

21(a) MADA SHETTY, S/O LATE CHIKKA MADASHETTY, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS.

¶88

21(b) HUCHAIAH SHETTY, S/O LATE CHIKKA MADASHETTY, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, BOTH ARE R/O MELKUNDI VILLAGE, NANJANGUD TQ, HURA POST, MYSORE DISTRICT-571 301.

¶89

- 7 - NC: 2023:KHC:21192-DB WA No. 4720 of 2017

¶90

BILIGIRI RANGAIAH, S/O HANUMANTHAIAH,

¶91

MAJOR, SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS

¶92

(a) SMT MAHADEVI W/O BELEGIRIRANGAIAH SINCE DECEASED BY HER LR

¶93

22 (a)(i). RANGAIAH S/O LATE BILIGIRI RANGAIAH AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS R/O MELKUNDI VILLAGE NANJANGUD TQ HURA POST, MYSORE DISTRICT-571 301.

¶94

23. MYSORE MADASETTY,

¶95

MAJOR, SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS

¶96

i. MADAMMA, W/O MADASETTY, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS.

¶97

ii. KALINGA SHETTY, S/O MADASHETTY

¶98

iii. MAHADEVA SHETTY, S/O MADASHETTY.

¶99

iv. BHATTI, S/O MADASETTY.

¶100

SIDDAIAH S/O DUGGALLI BASAPPA, MAJOR

¶101

SHIVAYYA SETTY S/O MARIBASAVA SHETTY, MAJOR SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS

¶102

25(a) KEMPAMMA, W/O SHIVAYYA SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,

¶103

25(b) MAHADEVA SHETTY, S/O SHIVAIAH SHETTY,

¶104

8 - NC: 2023:KHC:21192-DB WA No. 4720 of 2017

¶105

AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,

¶106

25(c)BASAVA SHETTY, S/O SHIVAIAH SHETTY,

¶107

25 (d) CHINNAIAH SHETTY, S/O SHIVAIAH SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS.

¶108

MAHADEVAPPA, S/O MADAPPA, MAJOR, SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS,

¶109

26(a) SMT NAGAMMA, W/O MAHADEVAPPA AND MINOR CHILDREN SHRI MAHESH, AGED ABOUT 3 YEARS, AND MAHADEVI 5 YEARS REPRESENTED BY THEIR MOTHER SMT NAGAMMA.

¶110

SHETTIHALLI MADAIAH, S/O SIDDAIAH, MAJOR, SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS,

¶111

27(a) SWAMAIAH, S/O LATE SHETTIHALLI MADAIAH, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/O MELKUNDI VILLAGE, NANJANGUD TQ, HURA POST-571 301, MYSORE DISTRICT. R6 TO 27 ARE RESIDENTS OF MELKUNDI VILLAGE, NANJANGUD TQ, MYSORE DISTRICT - 571301.

¶112

APPANNEGOWDA, S/O BEEREGOWDA, SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS,

¶113

28(a) SANNAMMA, W/O LATE APPANNE GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS.

¶114

28(b) SHIVANNA,

¶115

- 9 - NC: 2023:KHC:21192-DB WA No. 4720 of 2017

¶116

S/O LATE APPANNE GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,

¶117

28(c) CHIKKANNA, S/O LATE APPANNEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS.

¶118

RESPONDENTS 28(a) TO 28(c) ARE R/O M KONGALLI, HURA POST, NANJANGUD TQ, MYSORE DISTRICT-571 301.

¶119

SHIVAPPA, S/O RAMAPPA, MAJOR, R/O DUGGALLI, NANJANGUD TQ, MYSORE DISTRICT-571 301.

¶120

…RESPONDENTS

¶121

(BY SRI LAXMI NARAYAN, AGA FOR R1 AND R2, V/O/DTD: 10.03.2023 APPEAL QUA DECD R5, R8, R21(A), R24 & R29 ARE STANDS ABATED,

¶122

R3, R4, R6(A), R7(A), R9(A), R9(B), R9(C), R10(A), R10(B), R11, R13(A), R14, R16, R17(A), R18(A), R19(A), R19(B), R19(C), R19(D), R19(E), R21(B), R23(B), R23(F) R27(A), R28(B) - SERVED, V/O/DT: 17.04.2023 NOTICE IN R/O R7(B), R15(A), R12(A), R20, R22(A)(A), R23(A & C), R25(A-D), R26(A) AND R28(C) ARE SERVED THROUGH PAPER PUBLICATION)

¶123

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 09/11/2016 PASSED IN THE WRIT PETITION 761-766/1994.

¶124

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶125

JUDGMENT

¶126

This intra court appeal is filed challenging the order passed by the learned Single Judge in terms of the order dated

¶127

10 -

¶128

NC: 2023:KHC:21192-DB WA No. 4720 of 2017

¶129

09.11.2016 passed in Writ Petitions No.761-766/1994. In terms of the impugned order, the Learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petitions filed by the petitioners.

¶130

In the aforementioned writ petitions, writ petitioners impugned the order dated 29.11.1993 passed by the Land Tribunal, Nanjangud.

¶131

The brief facts necessary for adjudication of this appeal can be summarized as under:

¶132

Sy.No.124 of Malagalli Village, Nanjangud Taluk, Mysore District is the subject matter of dispute. The total extent of land is 24 acres 2 guntas. Form No.7 applications were filed in the said survey number claiming occupancy rights in respect of aforementioned land to a different extent held by the petitioners as tenants. Earlier the land Tribunal vide order dated 24.11.1978 had granted occupancy rights to certain persons and the said order was called in question by filing Writ Petitions No.10040-10045/1980. The writ petitions were allowed and the earlier order of land Tribunal was set-aside and

¶133

11 - NC: 2023:KHC:21192-DB WA No. 4720 of 2017

¶134

the matter was remitted for the Land Tribunal for fresh consideration.

¶135

After fresh consideration, the Land Tribunal has granted occupancy rights in favour of 33 applicants and claim of 3 applicants have been rejected. Challenging the said order, the writ petitioners filed the writ petitions. Learned Single Judge of this Court has rejected the petition on the ground that the claim of appellant No.1 seeking occupancy rights in respect of 3 acres and claim of other appellants seeking occupancy rights in respect of 1 acre is not substantiated by records. Aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge, writ petitioners are before this Court.

¶136

Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellants and learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.

¶137

Learned counsel for the appellants to substantiate his contention has also filed an application under Order XLI Rule 27 Code of Civil Procedure for production of additional documents. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit

¶138

- 12 - NC: 2023:KHC:21192-DB WA No. 4720 of 2017

¶139

that the additional documents produced viz., RTC pertaining to Sy.No.124 and the revenue receipt pertaining to the aforementioned land would establish the fact that appellant No.1 is in possession of 3 acres of land in the aforementioned Survey number. He would further submit that the Tribunal is not justified in granting only 20 guntas of land in favour of the 1^st appellant. The Tribunal ought to have granted 3 acres of land to appellant No.1 and should have granted occupancy rights to the remaining appellants based on the statement of the President of the Hostel which was given on 26.11.1978.

¶140

This Court has considered the contentions raised at the bar and also perused the records as well as the additional documents produced along with the application under Order XLI Rule 27 Code of Civil Procedure.

¶141

As far as the additional documents produced before this Court is concerned, this Court is of the view that said statement at Annexure - A cannot be taken into consideration for the simple reason that the documents are all the revenue records for the years 1982-83 onwards. Since the Court has to decide the claim for occupancy rights under the provisions of

¶142

13 - NC: 2023:KHC:21192-DB WA No. 4720 of 2017

¶143

the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, the Court has to consider whether the person who claims occupancy was cultivating the land as a tenant immediately before 1.3.1974. The claimant has to produce records/evidence to show that he was legally cultivating the land as a tenant immediately prior to 1.3.1974. Since the documents sought to be produced as additional documents are not the documents immediately prior to 1.3.1974, the application cannot be allowed and the documents sought to be produced as a additional evidence cannot be taken into consideration. Accordingly, the application for production of additional evidence is rejected.

¶144

So far as the contention of the appellant that occupancy right is to be granted to appellant No.1 in respect of 3 acres and occupancy right to the extent of 1 acre in favour of appellants No.3 and 4 is concerned, the said claim is not supported by any acceptable material. Except the statement of the President of Sarvajanika Vidyarthi Nilaya marked at Annexure - A which is given in the year 1978, there is nothing on record to accept the contention of the appellant no.1 that he was in possession of 3 acres of land as a tenant immediately before 01.03.1974. Also there is nothing on record to hold that

¶145

14 - NC: 2023:KHC:21192-DB WA No. 4720 of 2017

¶146

the appellants No.3 and 4 were in possession of 1 acre of land as tenants immediately before 01.03.1974.

¶147

On the other hand, Tribunal has taken into consideration statement given by the Secretary of the hostel which owned the property. The statement dated 23.11.1977 which is issued by the Secretary of the Hostel which owned the land does not support the claim of the appellants. The Tribunal has relied upon the statement of the Secretary and has chosen to ignore the statement of the President. It is required to the noticed that the statement dated 23.11.1977 issued by the Secretary is prior to the statement said to have been issued by the President.

¶148

No ground is made out before the learned Single Judge or before this Court as to why the statement relating to cultivation of property by the tenants given by the Secretary is to be ignored and statement given by the President is to be accepted.

¶149

The Tribunal has granted occupancy rights to 33 claimants and did not deem it appropriate to refer to the

¶150

NC: 2023:KHC:21192-DB WA No. 4720 of 2017

¶151

15 -

¶152

statement of the President which was given in the year 1978. Claim filed by other 3 persons is rejected. Except the 6 claimants, others have not questioned the order of the Tribunal.

¶153

Since, the appellants have not produced any acceptable records to substantiate their claim to grant occupancy to higher extent of land than what is granted by the Tribunal, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the order passed by the Learned Single Judge in dismissing the Writ Petitions and confirming the order passed by the Tribunal.

¶154

For the reasons assigned above, this Court is of the

¶155

view that no grounds are made out by the appellant to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge.

¶156

Accordingly, writ appeal is dismissed .

¶157

Sd/JUDGE

¶158

Sd/JUDGE

¶159

BRN

Puttaswamegowda v. Land Tribunal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Puttaswamegowda v. Land Tribunal

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

Smt Ujjwala Shenoy Vs D B Jatti

Mr M Kumar Vs Mrs Nethravathi

Heena Banu Vs State by Kumaraswamy Layout Ps

Mr Melvyn Lobo Vs Mrs Maria Clera Lobo

M/S. Uma Estates and Projects (P) Ltd. Vs M/S. Bearys Properties and Development Pvt. Ltd.

M J Mehta and Co., Vs Official Liquidator