Allowed

Sri Ashok S/O Ramchandra Bhar v. the Assistant Commissioner

Karnataka HC14 Nov 2024WP/105829/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought correction of revenue records still reflecting an alleged tenant's name despite a Land Tribunal order rejecting the tenant's occupancy rights application. The State consented to consider the representation; mandamus issued to decide it within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Mandamus directing respondent No.2 to consider the representations dated 10.04.2023 and 12.04.2023 and pass suitable orders within four weeks.

Sri Ashok S/O Ramchandra Bhar Vs the Assistant… — Property and Title | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC-D:16690 WP No. 105829 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,

¶4

DHARWAD BENCH

¶5

DATED THIS THE 14^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO. 105829 OF 2024 (KLR-RR/SUR)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SRI. ASHOK S/O. RAMCHANDRA BHAT, AGE: 74 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE SERVICE, R/O. KAGAL KUMTA TALUK, UTTARA KANNADA DISTRICT-581343.

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI. LINGESH V. KATTEMANE, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. S.G. KADADAKATTI, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, KUMTA SUB-DIVISION,

¶15

UTTARA KANNADA DISTRICT-581343.

¶16

THE TAHASILDAR, KUMTA TALUK, UTTARA KANNADA DISTRICT-581343.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶19

(BY SRI. JAIRAM SIDDI, HCGP)

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS BY DIRECTING THE 2^ND RESPONDENT TO PREPARE AND PROPOSAL AND FORWARD TO THE 1^ST RESPONDENT AND ON RECEIPT OF THE SAME THE 1^ST RESPONDENT TO PASS ORDERS IN TERMS OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 10-04-2023 AND 12-04-2023 VIDE ANNEXURE-D & ANNEXURE-D1 BY ALLOWING THIS WRIT PETITION IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC.

¶21

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

¶22

2 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:16690 WP No. 105829 of 2024

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

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

¶25

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

¶26

the learned High Court Government Pleader for the State.

¶27

The petitioner claims to be the absolute owner and in possession of the property bearing R.S.No.48/1B and 48/1D measuring 8 guntas 12 annas situated at Kagal village, Kumta taluk and the name of the petitioner’s father was entered in the revenue records and the petitioner’s father was in possession and enjoyment of the land during his lifetime. Pursuant to the demise of his father, the petitioner continued to be in possession and enjoyment of the said land. RTC and patta book stand in the name of the father of the petitioner and presently in the name of the petitioner’s mother.

¶28

This being the state of affairs, one Pandurang Laxman Raiker filed Form No.7 seeking grant of occupancy rights in respect of Sy.No.48(1)(B) to the Land Tribunal, Kumta. Based on the said application, the Land Tribunal

¶29

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:16690 WP No. 105829 of 2024

¶30

vide order dated 16.12.1981, rejected the application filed by the tenant. Thereafter, the petitioner approached the Assistant Commissioner and the Tahasildar and requested to correct the revenue entries in the revenue records where the name of the alleged tenant is continuing in Column No.12(2) and name of government in Column Nos.9 & 12, which were produced in Land Tribunal order. Thereafter, the Assistant Commissioner-respondent No.1 sent a communication dated 21.08.2023 to the Tahasildar, Kumta to take necessary action on the application made by the petitioner and communicate the same to the petitioner. However, no action has been taken by the respondent No.2 till date. Hence, the petitioner is before this Court.

¶31

Learned High Court Government Pleader contends that the representation so made by the petitioner will be considered in accordance with law, if the petitioner is otherwise legally entitled and eligible, if reasonable time is granted.

¶32

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:16690 WP No. 105829 of 2024

¶33

Placing the submission of the learned HCGP on

¶34

record, I pass the following:

¶35

ORDER

¶36

i. This petition is allowed.

¶37

ii. A writ of mandamus is issued directing the

¶38

respondent No.2 to consider the representation dated 10.04.2023 and 12.04.2024 and pass suitable orders

¶39

in accordance with law within an outer limit of 4

¶40

weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order.

¶41

Sd/(PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE

¶42

KGK CT-MCK

¶43

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24

Sri Ashok S/O Ramchandra Bhar v. the Assistant Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Ashok S/O Ramchandra Bhar v. the Assistant Commissioner

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

Mustaq Ahmed S/O Alha Baksh Vs Smt Mamtaz W/O Mustaq Ahmed

Basavaraj Vs Mallikarjun

Indrakumar S/O Sharanappa Sajjanar Vs Rutusha W/O Indrakumar Sajjanar

Ashok Shankar Katenavvar Vs the State of Karnataka

M/S Amoghasiddheshwar Electricals Vs the Managing Director

Hoovappa S/O Fakirappa Doddannavar Vs the Under Secretary