Petitioner challenged revisional order setting aside relief granted regarding land dispute. Court dismissed writ petition as original civil suits were pending, leaving rights subject to court outcomes.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.13349 OF 2020 (KLR-RES)
BETWEEN:
SRI. SHIVANNA S/O LATE CHIKKANNA AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, R/AT HOSAKOTE VILLAGE, HAROHALLI HOBLI, KANAKAPURA TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 117.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. JAYAKIRTHI M.C., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by ARUN KUMAR M S Location: High Court of Karnataka
NC: 2023:KHC:40568 WP No.13349 of 2020
RESPONDENTS 4 TO 9 ARE R/AT KEBBEDODDI VILLAGE, HAROHALI HOBLI, KANAKAPURA TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 117.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MOHAMMED JAFFAR SHAH, AGA FOR R1 TO R3; SRI. PRAKASH M.H., ADVOCATE FOR R4, R6, R7 AND R9)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO SETASIDE THE ORDER DATED 03RD SEPTEMBER, 2020 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 IN REVISION PETITION.NO.100/20112012 VIDE ANNEXURE-E.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R
In this writ petition, the petitioner is assailing order dated
03rd September, 2020 (Annexure-E) passed by the respondent
No.1 in Revision Petition No.100/2011-12, modifying order dated 13th February, 2012 (Annexure-D) passed by the respondent No.2 in R.A. No.57/2011-12.
NC: 2023:KHC:40568 WP No.13349 of 2020
respondent No.2 in R.A. No.57/2011-12 was set-aside on the ground that, Original Suit No.184 of 2011 and Original Suit No.222 of 2011 are pending consideration before the competent courts, where the relief sought for by the plaintiffs are relating to the declaration and consequential relief. In this regard, on careful examination of statement of objections filed by the contesting respondents herein as per Annexure-R1, the petitioner has filed Original Suit No.184 of 2011 before the Civil Judge and JMFC, Kanakapura and same is pending consideration. The relief sought for by the petitioner is declaration in respect of the subject matter of the land. In that view of the matter, I am of the view that, there is no merit in the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Accordingly, writ petition is dismissed.
However, it is made clear that, rights of the parties is
subject to result of the aforementioned original suits.
SD/JUDGE
ARK
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the order setting aside RTC proceedings while civil suits were pending should be challenged via writ jurisdication.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
SHIVANNA S/O LATE CHIKKANNA
THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER RAMANAGARA DISTRICT
THE ASSISTANT COMMISSISONER RAMANAGARA
THE TAHSILDAR KANAKAPURA TALUK
ABDUL SUBAN S/O LATE ABDUL GAFOOR SAB
ABDUL BASHEED S/O LATE ABDUL GAFOOR SAB
E.S.INDIRESH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
