Disposed

Sri Mohan Babu Y v. the Tahsildar

Karnataka HC3 Mar 2023WP/3676/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners seek transfer of Khata regarding 2 acres of land in Varthur. The Court, hearing the matter as final on preliminary list, directed the respondent Tahsildar to grant Pavathi Khata based on a representation dated 16.08.2022 under Section 127 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, within three months.

What did the court decide?

Directed the respondent Tahsildar to consider the application dated 16.08.2022 and pass an appropriate order within three months.

Sri Mohan Babu Y Vs the Tahsildar — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

1 - WP No. 3676 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF MARCH, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT WRIT PETITION NO. 3676 OF 2023 (KLR-RR/SUR)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SRI MOHAN BABU Y S/O LATE YELLAPPA AGED 39 YEARS

¶8

SRI MANJUNATH Y S/O LATE YELLAPPA AGED 37 YEARS

¶9

SMT. ARUNA Y D/O LATE YELLAPPA AGED 54 YEARS

¶10

SMT. SUCHITRA Y D/O LATE YELLAPPA AGED 31 YEARS

¶11

SMT. ANURADHA Y D/O LATE YELLAPPA AGED 27 YEARS

¶12

Digitally signed by MARIGANGAIAH PREMAKUMARI Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶13

ALL ARE R/AT NO.41 HALASAHALLI, GUNJUR POST SARJAPURA HOBALI ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU – 560078.

¶14

…PETITIONERS

¶15

(BY SRI RUPESH R, ADV.)

¶16

AND:

¶17

THE TAHSILDAR BENGALURU EAST TALUK MINI VIDHANASOUDA K R PURAM BENGALURU – 560036.

¶18

…RESPONDENT

¶19

(BY SRI SHOWRI H.R., ADV.)

¶20

¶21

WP No. 3676 of 2023

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT TO TRANSFER KHATA IN FAVOUR OF PETITIONERS JOINTLY WITH RESPECT OF PROPERTY BEARING SY.NO.120, MEASURING 2.00 ACRES SITUATED AT VARTHUR, BENGALURU EAST TALUK, BENGALURU DIST., BY CONSIDERING THE REPRESENTATION DATED 09/09/2022 (ANNEXURE-A) WITHIN A PERIOD OF SIX WEEKS FROM THE DATE OF ORDER.

¶23

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

¶24

ORDER

¶25

Though the matter is listed for Preliminary Hearing,

¶26

with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, matter

¶27

is taken up for final disposal.

¶28

Heard the learned counsel Sri.Rupesh.R., for petitioners through video conference and learned Additional Government Advocate Sri.Showri.H.R., for respondent-Tahasildar who has taken notice. Perused the writ petition papers.

¶29

Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that, father of the petitioners was the absolute owner in possession and enjoyment of the land in Sy.No.120 (120/6) measuring 2 acres situated at Varthur Village, Bengaluru

¶30

¶31

WP No. 3676 of 2023

¶32

East Taluk, Bengaluru. The father of the petitioners is said to have died on 17.01.2021. Thereafter, petitioners submitted application at Annexure-A dated 16.08.2022 to the respondent-Tahasildar requesting to effect Pavathi Khatha of the property in question. Said representation is pending consideration and no orders have been passed. Hence, petitioners are before this Court.

¶33

Learned Additional Government Advocate Sri.H.R.Showri on behalf for respondent-Tahasildar would submit that if reasonable time is granted, the respondentTahasildar would take appropriate decision on Annexure-A, application dated 16.08.2022.

¶34

Petitioners claim that land in Sy.No.120 (120/6) measuring 2 acres situated at Varthur Village, Bengaluru East Taluk, Bengaluru was standing in the name of father of the petitioners and to that effect, petitioners have placed record of rights at Annexure-C. Petitioners have also placed on record the Genealogy Tree at Annexure-B. Annexure-D1 is the death certificate of mother and Annexure-D is the

¶35

¶36

WP No. 3676 of 2023

¶37

death certificate of Yellappa, father of the petitioners. Under Annexure-A, petitioners requested for effecting Pavathi Khatha. The respondent-Tahasildar is legally obliged to consider said application/representation dated 16.08.2022 in terms of Section 127 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964. Hence, the following:

¶38

ORDER

¶39

The respondent-Tahasildar is directed to consider the application/representation dated 16.08.2022 of the petitioners to effect Pavathi Khatha and to pass appropriate order in accordance with law, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶40

With the above, writ petition stands disposed of.

¶41

Sd/JUDGE

¶42

NC CT:bms List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29

Sri Mohan Babu Y v. the Tahsildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Mohan Babu Y v. the Tahsildar

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 Shankar Pachan Patel Vs the Assistant Commissioner

Sri Shivaraju Vs the State of Karnataka

Rathanamma Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Dinesh J Shetty Vs the State of Karnataka

Gollara Muddanna Since Dead by Lrs Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Thimmamma Vs the State of Karnataka