Allowed

Ramesh S/O Devendrappa Kammar v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC12 Jul 2023WP/103395/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition for mandamus. It directed the Gram Panchayat to enter the petitioners' names in the land revenue records regarding a specific property within one month, relying on a resolution passed by the Panchayat.

What did the court decide?

To enter the petitioners' names in land records (VPC No. 636, Hadali village) within one month of receiving the order, based on existing resolution.

Ramesh S/O Devendrappa Kammar Vs the… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC-D:7052 WP No. 103395 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF JULY, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO.103395 OF 2023 (LB-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

RAMESH S/O. DEVENDRAPPA KAMMAR, AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: HADALI VILLAGE, TQ: NARAGUND, DIST: GADAG 582207.

¶9

SMT. KAVITA W/O. MOHANKUMAR KAMMAR, AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: C/O: MOHANAKUMAR, NO.98 HG KUMBAR, 12^TH , DODDANAYAKANAKOPPA, DHARWAD-590008, TQ & DIST: DHARWAD.

¶10

SMT. LAXMAVVA W/O. DEVENDRAPPA KAMMAR, AGE: 53 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: HADALI VILLAGE, TQ: NARAGUND, DIST: GADAG 582207.

¶11

VIJAYALAKSHMI M KANKUPPI Digitally signed by VIJAYALAKSHMIM KANKUPPI Location: HighCourt of Karnataka, Dharwad

¶12

SMT. GIRIJA W/O. CHIDANAND BADIGER, AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: SAVADI VILLAGE, TQ: RON, DIST: GADAG-582209.

¶13

SMT. GEETA W/O. SUBHASH BADIGER, AGE: 33 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: CHIKKUMBI VILLAGE, TQ: SAUDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI-591110.

¶14

VIJAY S/O. DEVENDRAPPA KAMMAR, AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE WORK, R/O: HADALI VILLAGE, TQ: NARAGUND, DIST: GADAG-582207.

¶15

…PETITIONERS

¶16

¶17

NC: 2023:KHC-D:7052 WP No. 103395 of 2023

¶18

(BY SRI PRUTHVI K. S, ADVOCATE)

¶19

AND:

¶20

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRL. SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND PANCHAYAT RAJ, M. S. BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560001.

¶21

THE OFFICE OF HADALI GRAM PANCHAYAT, REPRESENTED BY ITS PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, HADALI VILLAGE, NARAGUND-582207, TQ: NARAGUND, DIST: GADAG.

¶22

…RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SRI PRASHANT V. MOGALI, HCGP FOR R1; SRI LAXMAN T. MANTAGANI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶24

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS BY DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO. 2 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED: 1/3/2023 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS VIDE ANNEXURE-E BY ENTERING THE NAME IN RESPECT OF LAND PROPERTY BRG VPC. NO. 636 MEASURING TO AN EXTENT OF 33.69 GUNTAS SITUATED AT HADALI VILLAGE, TQ: NARAGUND, DIST: GADAG AS PER THE COMPROMISE DECREE DATED: 11/2/2023 PASSED BY THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, NARGUND IN O.S. NO. 18/2023, VIDE ANNEXURE-D.

¶25

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

¶26

3 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:7052 WP No. 103395 of 2023

¶27

ORDER

¶28

This petition is filed by the petitioners seeking for a writ of mandamus with a direction to respondent No.2 to consider their representation dated 01.03.2023 vide Annexure-E to enter their name in respect of land property bearing VPC No.636 measuring to an extent of 33.69 guntas situated at Hadali village, Tq: Naragund, Dist: Gadag as per the compromise decree dated 11.02.2023 passed by the Court of Civil Judge and JMFC, Nargund in O.S.No.18/2023, vide Annexure-D.

¶29

It is the contention of learned counsel for the petitioners that pursuant to the compromise petition in O.S.No.18/2023, compromise decree came to be drawn up on 11.02.2023 in the aforesaid original suit. Based on which, he filed an application to enter the names of petitioners as per the terms and conditions of the compromise petition and the decree. Respondent No.2 ought to have considered the same.

¶30

Respondent No.2 today files a memo submitting that the representation of petitioners has been considered and a resolution has been passed by respondent No.2 dated 31.05.2023 to enter the names of petitioners as per the representation. Therefore, in view of the fact that respondent No.2 has passed a resolution to enter the names, this petition would not survive for

¶31

NC: 2023:KHC-D:7052 WP No. 103395 of 2023

¶32

¶33

consideration any more as it has spent itself. Respondent No.2 has agreed and passed a resolution to enter the names in accordance to the compromise decree. Accordingly, I pass the following;

¶34

ORDER

¶35

i) Writ petition is allowed.

¶36

ii) Based on the resolution passed, respondent No.2 shall

¶37

enter the names of petitioners with regard to property bearing VPC No.636 of Hadali village within a period of one month from

¶38

the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶39

Sd/JUDGE

¶40

AM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13

Ramesh S/O Devendrappa Kammar v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh S/O Devendrappa Kammar 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Padma W/O Laxmi Narayan Nagaukatte Vs Girish Shridhar Shetti

Sanjeevini Recreation Club Vs the State of Karnataka

Jude S/O George Fernandes Vs Martin George Fernandes

Ajmeer Ali S/O Khajamainuddin Vs Sri. Ravindra S/O Basavanthagouda Malipatil

Miss.N. Manjula D/O. Late N Thippaih Setty Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Ananth S/O Ramachandrappa Gonabal Vs the State of Karnataka