Dismissed

Hanamanthappa S/O Fakkirappa Dasar v. Land Tribunal Hangal

Karnataka HC25 Nov 2024WP/103552/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of two cross writ petitions seeking quashing of an order rejecting occupancy rights. All parties appeared and executed a compromise petition defining land shares. The Court approved the settlement, quashed the impugned order, and directed revenue authorities to record entries and issue forms.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order quashed; revenue entries made per compromise; Land Tribunal to issue Form No. 10.

Hanamanthappa S/O Fakkirappa Dasar Vs Land Tribunal Hangal — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:17260 WP No. 103552 of 2019 C/W WP No.103550 of 2019

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 25^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024 BEFORE

¶3

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 103552 OF 2019 (LR-) C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 103550 OF 2019(LR-)

¶5

IN WRIT PETITION NO.103552 OF 2019

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

HANAMANTHAPPA S/O. FAKKIRAPPA DASAR, SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR’S.

¶8

SMT. PREMA W/O. HANAMANTHAPPA DASAR, AGE: 53 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD & AGRICULTURE,

¶9

SRI. VINAYAKA S/O. HANAMANTHAPPA DASAR, AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,

¶10

SMT. BHARATHI D/O. HANAMANTHAPPA DASAR, AGE: 34 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD & AGRICULTURE,

¶11

SMT. TANUJA D/O. HANAMANTHAPPA DASAR, AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD & AGRICULTURE,

¶12

MALLIKARJUN
RUDRAYYA
KALMATH
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
DHARWAD
BENCH

¶13

SMT. VEENA D/O. HANAMANTHAPPA DASAR, AGE: 33 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD & AGRICULTURE,

¶14

FAKKIRAPPA S/O. HANAMNATHAPPA DASAR, SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS.

¶15

SMT. LAXMAVAA W/O. FAKKIRAPPA DASAR, SINCE DECEASED BY HER LRS.

¶16

SRI. RAMACHANDRA S/O. FAKKIRAPPA DASAR, AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,

¶17

SRI. RAVINDRA S/O. FAKKIRAPPA DASAR, AGE: 56 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR’S

¶18

2 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:17260 WP No. 103552 of 2019 C/W WP No.103550 of 2019

¶19

7(A) SMT. PRABHAVATHI W/O. RAVINDRA DASAR & PAWAR, AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. WARD NO.15, HANGAL, DIST: HAVERI-581104.

¶20

7(B) DEEPA HUBBALLI @ MOHITE, W/O. RAJU JADAV, AGE: 34 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. SAVALAGI, TALUK: JAMAKHANDI, DISTRICT: BAGALKOT-587330.

¶21

7(C) CHITRA W/O. TUKARAM JADAV, AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. 793, ANAND NAGAR, BEHIND CHURCH, OLD-HUBBALLI, HUBBALLI-580024.

¶22

7(D) BHARATHI W/O. RAGHAVENDRA MULIMANI, AGE: 29 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. HOSA ONI, NEAR DURGAMMA TEMPLE, SALGAON, CHIGALLI, MUNDAGODU, DISTRICT: UTTAR KANNADA-581349.

¶23

SRI. VENKA S/O. FAKKIRAPPA DASAR, AGE: 53 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,

¶24

SMT. SUMANGALA W/O. ASHOK DASAR, AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD & AGRICULTURE,

¶25

SMT. ASHWINI D/O. ASHOK DASAR, AGE: 20 YEARS, OCC: NIL,

¶26

AKSHATA D/O. ASHOK DASAR, AGE: 18 YEARS, OCC: NIL,

¶27

SRI. GIRISH S/O. ASHOK DASAR, AGE: 16 YEARS, OCC: NIL,

¶28

SRI. HARISHA S/O. ASHOK DASAR, AGE: 16 YEARS, OCC: NIL, RESPONDENTS 12 & 13 ARE MINORS REPRESENTED BY THEIR MOTHER RESPONDENT NO.9 ALL ARE R/O. HALEKOTI, HANGAL, DIST: HAVERI.

¶29

.…PETITIONERS

¶30

(BY SRI. MAHESH WODEYAR, ADVOCATE)

¶31

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:17260 WP No. 103552 of 2019 C/W WP No.103550 of 2019

¶32

AND:

¶33

LAND TRIBUNAL HANGAL, AT HANGAL, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, DIST: HAVERI.

¶34

SMT. INDIRABAI W/O. NAGESHRAO DESAI, SINCE DECEASED BY HER LRS

¶35

SRI JAYAPRAKASH S/O. NAGESH RAO DESAI,

¶36

SRI ACHHUTRAO S/O. NAGESH RAO DESAI, BOTH ARE MAJORS, OCC: R/O. HANGAL, DIST: HAVERI.

¶37

…RESPONDENTS

¶38

(BY SRI. V.S. KALASURMATH, AGA FOR R1; SRI. SHRIHARSH A. NEELOPANT, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3)

¶39

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OR ORDER, OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 23.03.2018 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 (LAND TRIBUNAL) IN FILE NO. LRM/SR/R/130/17+176+177+17 HANGAL VIDE ANNEXURE-F TO THE EXTENT OF NOT GRANTING REMAINING 01 ACRE AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW FORM NO.7 AND GRANT OCCUPANCY RIGHTS IN RESPECT OF THE REMAINING 01 ACRE TOWARDS EASTERN PORTION IN LAND BEARING SY.NO.433 MEASURING 10 ACRE 01 GUNTA SITUATED AT HALEKOTI, HANGAL IN FAVOUR OF PETITIONERS AND ETC.

¶40

IN WRIT PETITION NO.103550 OF 2019 (LR-)

¶41

BETWEEN:

¶42

NINGAPPA S/O. HANMANTHAPPA SHIGGAVI, SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR’S.

¶43

SRI PRAKASH S/O. NINGAPPA DASAR, AGE: 53 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,

¶44

RAJAPPA S/O. FAKKIRAVVA DOLLESHWAR, SINCE DECEASED BY HER LR’S.

¶45

SRI. FAKKIRAPPA S/O. RAJAPPA DOLLESHWAR, AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,

¶46

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:17260 WP No. 103552 of 2019 C/W WP No.103550 of 2019

¶47

BOTH ARE R/O. HANGAL, DIST: HAVERI. (DELETED)

¶48

…PETITIONERS

¶49

(BY SRI. MAHESH WODEYAR, ADVOCATE)

¶50

AND:

¶51

LAND TRIBUNAL HANAGAL, AT HANGAL, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN,

¶52

DIST: HAVERI.

¶53

SMT INDIRABAI W/O. NAGESHRAO DESAI, SINCE DECEASED BY HER LR’S.

¶54

SRI. JAYAPRAKASH S/O. NAGESH RAO DESAI, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS,

¶55

SRI. ACHHUTRAO S/O. NAGESH RAO DESAI, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. HANGAL, DIST: HAVERI.

¶56

…RESPONDENTS

¶57

(BY SRI. V.S. KALASURMATH, AGA FOR R1; SRI. SHRIHARSH A. NEELOPANT, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3)

¶58

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OR ORDER, OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 23.03.2018 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 (LAND TRIBUNAL) IN FILE NO.LRM/SR/R/130/17+176+177++17 HANGAL VIDE ANNEXURE-F AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW FORM NO.7 FILED BY THE PETITIONERS HEREIN IN RESPECT OF THE AGRICULTURAL LAND BEARING SY.NO.433 MEASURING 10 ACRE 01 GUNTA SITUATED AT HALEKOTI, HANGAL OUT OF THAT TO AN EXTENT OF, 01 ACRE IN FAVOUR OF PETITIONER NO.1 (TOWARDS WESTERN PORTION OF LAND BELONGING TO APPLICANT NO.1 (FAKKIRAPPA BHIMANNA DASAR) AND 02-00 ACRE IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER NO.2 TOWARDS WESTERN PORTION OF THE LAND BELONGING TO APPLICANT NO.2 (NINGAPPA HANAMANTHAPPA SHIGAAVI) RESPECTIVELY AND ETC.

¶59

THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶60

5 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:17260 WP No. 103552 of 2019 C/W WP No.103550 of 2019

¶61

ORAL ORDER

¶62

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR)

¶63

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners

¶64

Sri.Mahesh Wodeyar in both these petitions, learned AGA for respondent No.1-State and the learned counsel Sri. Shriharsh A.Neelopant for respondent Nos.2 and 3.

¶65

These petitions came to be filed by the tenants seeking to challenge the impugned order dated 23.03.2018 passed by the 1^st respondent-Land Tribunal, in not granting the remaining 1 acre as occupancy rights towards eastern portion of land bearing Sy.No.433 measuring in all 10 acres 1 gunta situated at Halekoti, Hangal in favour of petitioners and in the second petition, two petitioners also filed for similar relief claiming 1 acre occupancy rights in No.433 measuring 10 acres 1 gunta, which came to be rejected by the respondent No.1-Land Tribunal.

¶66

During the pendency of these petitions, the petitioners and respondent Nos.2 and 3 have amicably settled their dispute and have filed compromise petition

¶67

6 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:17260 WP No. 103552 of 2019 C/W WP No.103550 of 2019

¶68

today, under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure in order to put an end to the long drawn litigation so that they can live amicably and peacefully without hindrance and interference by each of the parties. All the parties in both these petitions are present physically before the Court including the petitioners and

¶69

respondent Nos.2 and 3 in both the cases. The compromise petition executed by the parties, are

¶70

reproduced hereunder:

¶71

“1. That the petitioners admit that, the respondent No.2 and 3 are the absolute owners in possession and enjoyment of the petition property bearing Sy. No.433 to the extent of 07 acre 21 guntas out of total extent of 10 acres 01 guntas situated at Halekoti village of Hangal Taluka since time immemorial towards Eastern side of the petition property bounded by

¶72

East: Remaining land in Sy. No.433 West: Government Road, North: Land belonging to Lingaraj Kabbur South: Land belonging to Ramesh Nagajjanavar

¶73

2. Further the respondents No.2 and 3 admits that, the petitioners in WP No.103552/2019 (LR) i.e., (1) Smt. Premavva W/o. Hanamanthappa Dasar, (2) Ramachandra S/o. Fakkirappa Dasar, (3) Smt. Prabhavati W/o. Ravindra Dasar, (4) Venkanna S/o. Fakkirappa Dasar and (5) Smt. Sumangala W/o. Ashok Dasar are in possession of the petition property as occupants bearing Sy No.433 of Halekoti village of Hangal Taluka as tenants to the extent of

¶74

¶75

NC: 2024:KHC-D:17260 WP No. 103552 of 2019 C/W WP No.103550 of 2019

¶76

01 acre 00 guntas towards eastern side of the petition property bounded by

¶77

East: Land belonging to Gali Family West: Remaining land in Sy No.433 North: Land belonging to Lingaraj Kabbur South: Remaining land in Sy. No.433

¶78

3. Further the respondents No.2 and 3 admits that, the petitioners in WP No.103550/2019 (LR) ie, Prakash S/o. Ningappa Dasar is in possession of the petition property bearing Sy. No.433 of Halekoti village of Hangal Taluka as occupants to the extent of 30 guntas towards Southern side of the petition property bounded by:

¶79

East: Remaining land in Sy. No.433 West: Remaining land in Sy. No.433 North: Remaining land in Sy. No.433 South: Land belonging to Ramesh Nagajjanvar

¶80

4. Further the respondents No.2 and 3 admits that, the petitioners in WP No.103552/2019 (LR) ie.. (1) Smt. Premavva W/o. Hanamanthappa Dasar, (2) Ramachandra S/o. Fakkirappa Dasar, (3) Smt. Prabhavati W/o. Ravindra Dasar, (4) Venkanna S/o. Fakkirappa Dasar and (5) Smt. Sumangala W/o. Ashok Dasar are in possession of the petition property as occupants bearing Sy. No.433 of Halekoti village of Hangal Taluka as tenants to the extent of 30 guntas towards Southern side of the petition property bounded by

¶81

East: Land belonging to Ashok Kamati West: Remaining land in Sy. No.433 North: Remaining land in Sy No.433 South: Remaining land in Sy. No.433

¶82

5. The petitioners and respondents have agreed to allot their respective share as per the PT Sheet annexed to the present compromise petition. The said PT Sheet is part and parcel of this compromise petition.

¶83

6. Further the petitioners and respondents No.2 and 3 have agreed that they will not initiate any case or

¶84

8 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:17260 WP No. 103552 of 2019 C/W WP No.103550 of 2019

¶85

proceedings or any claim as against each other in future.

¶86

7. The petitioners and respondents No.2 and 3 agreed to ensure that either they or their family members will not interfere in each other personal in respect of the petition property as agreed in the present compromise petition in future.

¶87

8. The petitioners and respondents No.2 and 3 herein have undertaken that they will not to file any case against each other with regard to the subject matters in question.

¶88

9. The above settlement arrived at between the petitioners and respondents No.2 and 3 is with free will, wish and free consent of the petitioners and respondents No.2 and 3 without any force, coercion and undue influence made against each other. the contents of the present settlement have been read over to the petitioners and respondents No.2 and 3 in the language known to them and have clearly understood the contents of present settlement and have amicably with free consent put their signatures on the present compromise petition.

¶89

10. In view of the above compromise petition the above writ petition may be disposed off in terms of present compromise in the ends of justice and equity.

¶90

11. That the petitioners and respondents No.2 and 3 are entitled to enter their names in the record of rights of the petition property allotted to their share in terms of the present compromise petition. Further both the petitioners and respondents have agreed for the same.”

¶91

In view of the compromise petition executed

¶92

and entered into by the parties, i.e., the petitioners in both

¶93

the cases and respondent Nos.2 and 3, the present petitions are disposed of.

¶94

9 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:17260 WP No. 103552 of 2019 C/W WP No.103550 of 2019

¶95

In view of the compromise entered into

¶96

between the parties, this Court has enquired with the parties who are physically present before the Court, as to the genuineness and authenticity of the compromise petition filed before this Court.

¶97

The petitioners in both the cases submit that they have voluntarily executed and signed the Compromise Petition, without any force, coercion or undue influence, so also respondent Nos.2 and 3 submit that they have also voluntarily entered into the Compromise without any force, coercion or undue influence.

¶98

All the parties agree that they will abide by the terms and conditions of the Compromise Petition, to ensure that each of the parties will not interfere with each others property. They also agree that they do not have any objection in the change of entry in the Revenue Records with regard to their respective shares and properties mentioned in the Compromise Petition.

¶99

The parties are at liberty to enjoy the property

¶100

that is assigned to their respective shares.

¶101

10 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:17260 WP No. 103552 of 2019 C/W WP No.103550 of 2019

¶102

The Revenue entry shall be made by the

¶103

statutory authorities, in accordance to the terms the conditions stipulated in the Compromise Petition.

¶104

Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶105

ORDER

¶106

i. These petitions are disposed of.

¶107

ii. The impugned order passed by the 1^st respondent at Annexure-F is hereby quashed.

¶108

iii. The entries with regard to the names of the petitioners as per the Compromise Petition shall be entered in the revenue records by the authorities in both the cases.

¶109

iv. In view of the execution of the compromise petition, the 1^st respondent-Land Tribunal shall issue Form No.10, in accordance to the Compromise Petition to the extent of measurement mentioned in the Compromise Petition to each of their respective names.

¶110

v. Ordered accordingly.

¶111

Sd/(PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE

¶112

KGK CT-MCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26

Hanamanthappa S/O Fakkirappa Dasar v. Land Tribunal Hangal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hanamanthappa S/O Fakkirappa Dasar v. Land Tribunal Hangal

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 Suresh S/O Venkataraman Bhat Vs the Management of Nwkrtc

Sri Nisar Ahmed S/O Maktumhussain Chandshawale Vs the Management of Nwkrtc

Sri Suvas S/O Gajanan Kulkarni Vs the Management of Nwkrtc

Ningappa S/O. Hanmanthappa Shiggavi Vs Land Tribunal Hanagal

Shri. a a Shaikh Abdul Razak S/O Annasahab Shaikh Vs the Managing Director and the Appellate Authority

Shri Kempanna S/O Yallappa Pujari Vs the State of Karnataka