Allowed

K.N. Venugopal v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC25 Oct 2023WP/2960/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The writ petition challenged an order dated 18th July 2012 passed by the Deputy Commissioner. The High Court held that the order was passed under Section 136(2) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, while Section 136(3) provides revisional jurisdiction to the authorities. The court set aside the impugned order.

What did the court decide?

The order dated 18th July 2012 passed by respondent No. 2 in R.A. No. 139 of 2005-06 was set aside and matter remitted for fresh consideration.

K.N. Venugopal Vs the State of Karnataka — Property and Title | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC:37758 WP NO.2960 OF 2013

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 25^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.2960 OF 2013 (KLR-RR/SUR)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

K.N. VENUGOPAL S/O K.M. NARAYANASWAMY AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS R/O KADASHIGENAHALLI, NANDI HOBLI, CHICKBALLAPUR TALUK, CHICKBALLAPUR DISTRICT.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. M. JAIPRAKASH REDDY, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by ARUN KUMAR M S Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶13

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶14

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CHICKBALLAPUR DISTRICT CHICKBALLAPUR - 562 101.

¶15

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER CHICKBALLAPUR SUB-DIVISION CHICKBALLAPUR - 562 101.

¶16

K.N. RAMAKRISHNA S/O K.M. NARAYANASWAMY AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS R/O NO.174, 1^ST STAGE,

¶17

¶18

NC: 2023:KHC:37758 WP NO.2960 OF 2013

¶19

2^ND PHASE, 4^TH CROSS 7^TH MAIN GOKUL LAYOUT, YESHWANTHPUR BENGALURU - 560 054.

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SRI. MOHAMMED JAFFAR SHAH, AGA FOR R1 TO R3; SRI. K. VENKATASWAMY, ADVOCATE FOR R4)

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 18^TH APRIL, 2005 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.3 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ORDER DATED 18^TH JULY, 2012 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.2 VIDE ANNEXURE-B; AND ETC.

¶23

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

¶24

O R D E R

¶25

In this writ petition, the petitioner is assailing order

¶26

dated 18^th April, 2005 (Annexure-A) passed by the respondent No.3 in R.A. No.156 of 2001-02 and order dated 18^th July, 2012 (Annexure-B) passed by the respondent No.2 in R.A. No.139 of 2005-06.

¶27

Heard Sri. M. Jayaprakash Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner; Sri. Mohammed Jaffar Shah, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1 to 3; and Sri. K. Venkataswamy, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.4.

¶28

¶29

NC: 2023:KHC:37758 WP NO.2960 OF 2013

¶30

Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on careful examination of order dated 18^th July, 2012 (Annexure-B) passed by the respondent No.2 in R.A. No.139 of 2005-06, wherein it is stated by the respondent No.2 that the revision petition does not lie against the order passed under Section 136(2) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act (for short, hereinafter referred to as 'Act'). The language employed under Section 136(3) of the Act provides for Revisional jurisdiction to the respondent No.2. Hence, order dated 18^th July, 2012 (Annexure-B) passed by the respondent No.2 is contrary to the provisions contained under Section 136(3) of the Act. Accordingly, order dated 18^th July, 2012 (Annexure-B) passed by the respondent No.2 in R.A. No.139 of 2005-06 is set-aside and matter is remitted to the respondent No.2 for fresh consideration, after affording an opportunity of hearing to both the parties. In the result writ petition is allowed.

¶31

SD/JUDGE

¶32

ARK

K.N. Venugopal v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.N. Venugopal 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

Peerpasha Vs the State of Karnataka and Ors.

Gurunath Vs the State of Karnataka and Ors.

Jagadevi and Ors. Vs the State of Karnataka and Ors.

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

Sri G L Jeevan Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Mr Venkataramanegowda Vs the State of Karnataka