Allowed

Parameshwarappa S/O Karabasappa Sanadi v. Ningappa S/O Bheerappa Purad

Karnataka HC24 Oct 2024WA/100489/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Legal representatives of a grantee appealed against setting aside orders restoring granted land under the PTCL Act to the purchaser. During pendency parties settled and the purchaser agreed to withdraw his writ petition; appeal allowed, Single Judge's order set aside.

What did the court decide?

Single Judge's order dated 26.07.2023 in W.P.No.101257/2016 set aside; writ petition dismissed as withdrawn pursuant to joint memo of settlement.

Parameshwarappa S/O Karabasappa Sanadi Vs Ningappa S/O… — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC-D:15473-DB WA No. 100489 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2024 PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD

¶5

AND

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T WRIT APPEAL NO.100489 OF 2023

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

PARAMESHWARAPPA S/O. KARABASAPPA SANADI AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/AT. NEGALUR, HAVERI TALUK, HAVERI DISTRICT-581 110.

¶9

NAGARAJA S/O. KARABASAPPA SANADI AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, R/AT. NEGALUR, HAVERI TALUK, HAVERI DISTRICT-581 110.

¶10

SMT. PUTTAVVA S/O. KARABASAPPA SANADI AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, R/AT. NEGALUR, HAVERI TALUK, HAVERI DISTRICT-581 110.

¶11

Digitally signed by MANJANNA E Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2024.10.26 10:33:35 +0530

¶12

ARUN S/O. KARABASAPPA SANADI AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/AT. NEGALUR, HAVERI TALUK, HAVERI DISTRICT-581 110.

¶13

MANJUNATHA S/O. KARABASAPPA SANADI AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/AT. NEGALUR, HAVERI TALUK, HAVERI DISTRICT-581 110.

¶14

…APPELLANTS

¶15

(BY SMT.V.VIDYA, ADVOCATE)

¶16

AND:

¶17

NINGAPPA S/O. BHEERAPPA PURAD AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/AT. NEGALUR, HAVERI TALUK, HAVERI DISTRICT-581 110.

¶18

¶19

NC: 2024:KHC-D:15473-DB WA No. 100489 of 2023

¶20

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HAVERI DISTRICT, HAVERI-581 110.

¶21

THE ASSISTANT COMMISIONER HAVERI SUB-DIVISION, HAVERI DISTRICT-581 110.

¶22

THE TAHSILDAR HAVERI TALUK, HAVERI DISTRICT-581 110.

¶23

SUB-REGISTRAR HAVERI TALUK, HAVERI DISTRICT-581 110.

¶24

GURUKUMARASWAMY S/O. GURUSWAMY GADDAGI MATH, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, R/AT. NEGALUR, HAVERI TALUK, HAVERI DISTRICT-581 110.

¶25

THE KARNATAKA STATE COMMISSIONER FOR THE SCHEDULED CAST AND SCHEDULE TRIBE, REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU-560 009.

¶26

…RESPONDENTS

¶27

(BY SRI. LAXMAN T. MANTAGANI, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. G.K.HIREGOUDAR, GOVT. ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R5; NOTICE TO R6 IS DISPENSED WITH VIDE COURT ORDER DTD. 24.10.2024; R7 SERVED)

¶28

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S.4 OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING THIS HON’BLE COURT TO, SET-ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN W.P.NO.101257/2016 (SC-ST) DATED 26.07.2023, ALLOW THIS WRIT APPEAL AND GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEFS AS THIS HON’BLE COURT DEEMS FIT TO GRANT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶29

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶30

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD

¶31

AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T

¶32

¶33

NC: 2024:KHC-D:15473-DB WA No. 100489 of 2023

¶34

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶35

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD)

¶36

This appeal is filed by the legal representatives of the original grantee challenging the order dated 26.07.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.101257/2016 whereby the writ petition filed by the purchaser has been allowed.

¶37

The land bearing Sy.No.520/2 measuring 10 acres 22 guntas was originally granted in favour of one Sanganabasappa s/o Ujjappa Sanadi by State Government on 14.04.1964. By violating the land grant condition, the legal representatives of the original grantee sold the land by registered sale deed dated 12.04.1978 to an extent of 4 acres 22 guntas. After the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as “the PTCL Act”, for short) came into force, the legal representatives of the original grantee filed an application for resumption of the land under Section 5 of the PTCL Act. The Assistant Commissioner by order dated 25.11.2015 has allowed the

¶38

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:15473-DB WA No. 100489 of 2023

¶39

application and directed to restore the land measuring 4 acres 22 guntas in favour of legal representatives of the original grantee.

¶40

Being aggrieved by the same, the purchaser has filed an appeal before the Deputy Commissioner. The Deputy Commissioner by order dated 07.01.2016 has confirmed the same. Being aggrieved by the orders passed by the Assistant Commissioner and the Deputy Commissioner, respondent No.1-purchaser has filed writ petition before this Court in W.P.No.101257/2016. This Court by order dated 26.07.2023 has allowed the said writ petition and set aside the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner and the Deputy Commissioner. Being aggrieved by the same, the legal representatives of the original grantee have filed this appeal.

¶41

During the pendency of this appeal, the parties have settled the matter and have filed a joint memo dated 23.10.2024 signed by all the parties and the first respondent has agreed to withdraw the writ petition.

¶42

¶43

NC: 2024:KHC-D:15473-DB WA No. 100489 of 2023

¶44

In view of the above, the appeal is allowed. The order dated 26.07.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.101257/2016, is set aside. The writ petition filed by the respondent No.1 is dismissed as withdrawn.

¶45

Sd/(H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE

¶46

Sd/-

¶47

(VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE

¶48

kmv

¶49

ct:vh

Parameshwarappa S/O Karabasappa Sanadi v. Ningappa S/O Bheerappa Purad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parameshwarappa S/O Karabasappa Sanadi v. Ningappa S/O Bheerappa Purad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Executive Engineer Vs Shri Narayan Parasu Patil

Shamsuddin P.P. S/O Mohammad Vs Allabax S/O Gulmohammad Agawan

Nagawwa @ Nagamma W/O Ishwar Hanamantanavar Vs Shri.Vittal S/O Siddappa Siddannavar

Mahantesh S/O Ramappa Mali Vs Sadashiv S/O Sheshappa Sarwad

Manjula @ Chaya W/O. Anand Vs Anand S/O. H P Ganapa

Shri. Nagaraj S/O Annappa Masti Vs the Managing Director