Allowed

Tukkabai Chavan v. the Joint Director of Land Records

Karnataka HC27 Aug 2024WP/106334/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed a Writ Petition seeking certiorari. It held that since the DDLR and JDLR proceeded on merits without passing an order on the condonation of delay application, their orders were unsustainable in law and were quashed.

What did the court decide?

The orders dated 17.01.2013 and 12.03.2014 passed by the Deputy Director and Joint Director of Land Records respectively are quashed.

Tukkabai Chavan Vs the Joint Director of Land Records — Property and Title | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:12127 WP No. 106334 of 2014

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,

¶3

DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 27^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 106334 OF 2014 (KLR-RR/SUR)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SMT. TUKKABAI CHAVAN W/O. VISHWANATHSA CHAVAN, AGE: 63 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. H.NO. 60 GAVI ONI, KORVAR ONI, HUBLI.

¶10

MR. RAJU CHAVAN S/O. VISHWANATHSA CHAVAN, AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. H.NO. 60, GAVI ONI, KORVAR ONI, HUBLI.

¶11

MR. SANJU CHAVAN S/O. VISHWANATHSA CHAVAN, AGE: 34 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. H.NO. 60, GAVI ONI, KORVAR ONI, HUBLI.

¶12

Digitally signed by THEJASKUMAR N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

SMT. VIDYAVATHI CHAVAN S/O. VISHWANATHSA CHAVAN, AGE: 33 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. H.NO. 60, GAVI ONI, KORVAR ONI, HUBLI.

¶14

MR. MANOJ CHAVAN S/O. VISHWANATHSA CHAVAN, AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. H.NO. 60, GAVI ONI, KORVAR ONI, HUBLI.

¶15

MR. LAXMIKANTH @ SRINIVAS CHAVAN, S/O. VISHWANATHSA CHAVAN, AGE: 29 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. H.NO. 60, GAVI ONI, KORVAR ONI, HUBLI.

¶16

SMT. PADMABAI BHARE SINCE DECEASED BY HER LR’S,

¶17

2 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:12127 WP No. 106334 of 2014

¶18

7(a) TIPPANNASA BHARE S/O. RAMCHANDRA BHARE, AGE: 73 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. DIWATE GALLI, HUBLI.

¶19

7(b) MAHADEV BHARE S/O. TIPPANNASA BHARE, AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. DIWATE GALLI, HUBLI.

¶20

7(c) JAYASHREE BHARE D/O. TIPPANNASA BHARE, AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O. DIWATE GALLI, HUBLI.

¶21

7(d) SMT. PUSHPABAI HABIB W/O. ASHOK HABIB, AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O. DIWATE GALLI, HUBLI.

¶22

7(e) SMT.ROOPA HABIB W/O. YALAAPPA HABIB, AGE: 43 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O. GAGI ONI, ARALIKATTI ONI, HUBLI.

¶23

7(f) SMT. SUNITA BABWA W/O NARAYANSA BABWA, AGE: 41 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O. DIWATE GALLI , HUBLI.

¶24

7(g) SOU. GEETA BHARE D/O TIPPANNASA BHARE, AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O. DIWATE GALLI , HUBLI.

¶25

RUKMANIBAI CHAVAN W/O. CHANDRAKANT CHAVAN, AGE: 59 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O. H.NO. 61, DIWATE GALLI, HUBLI.

¶26

CHANDRAKANT CHAVAN S/O. KRISHNASA CHAVAN, AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. H.NO. 61, DIWATE GALLI, HUBLI.

¶27

YALLAMMA IRKAL D/O. RAMCHANDRASA IRKAL, AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O. H NO. 61, DIWATE GALLI, HUBLI.

¶28

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:12127 WP No. 106334 of 2014

¶29

LALITABAI IRKAL D/O. RAMCHANDRASA IRKAL, AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O. H.NO. 61, DIWATE GALLI, HUBLI.

¶30

…PETITIONERS

¶31

(BY SRI. NEELENDRA.D.GUNDE AND SRI. SUNIL.S.DESAI., ADVOCATES)

¶32

AND:

¶33

THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS, D.C.COMPOUND, BELGAUM, DEPARTMENT OF LAND RECORDS, BELGAUM.

¶34

THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS-CITY SURVEY, MINI VIDHANA SOUDHA, HUBLI.

¶35

THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS, K.C.CIRCLE, DHARWAD.

¶36

SHANKARSA IRKAL S/O. RAMCHANDRASA IRKAL, AGE: 58YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. H.NO. 61 DIWATE GALLI, HUBLI.

¶37

SURESH IRKAL S/O. RAMCHANDRASA IRKAL, AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. H NO. 61 DIWATE GALLI, HUBLI.

¶38

…RESPONDENTS

¶39

(BY SMT. KIRTILATA.R.PATIL., HCGP FOR R1-R3; R4-R5- HELD SUFFICIENT)

¶40

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS.

¶41

THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER:

¶42

¶43

NC: 2024:KHC-D:12127 WP No. 106334 of 2014

¶44

ORAL ORDER

¶45

Sri.Neelendra D.Gunde., learned counsel for the petitioners and Smt.Kirtilata Patil., learned HCGP for respondents 1 to 3 have appeared in person.

¶46

An emergent notice to respondents 4 and 5 was ordered on 18.11.2014. A perusal of the office note depicts that respondents 4 and 5 are served and unrepresented. They have neither engaged the services of an advocate nor conducted the case as a party in person.

¶47

The captioned Writ Petition is filed seeking a Writ of Certiorari to quash the order dated 17.01.2013 passed by the Deputy Director of Land Records in � � ��

¶48

vide Annexure-A and the order dated 12.03.2014 passed by the Joint Director of Land Records in � � �� vide

¶49

Annexure-B.

¶50

Learned counsel for the respective parties urged several contentions. Heard the contentions and perused the Writ papers with utmost care.

¶51

The petitioners contend that one Krishnasa Chavan owned properties in Ward No. IV bearing CTS No.523 and Ward

¶52

5 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:12127 WP No. 106334 of 2014

¶53

No.III bearing CTS No.610/7A of Hubli city. He had four children namely Vishwanathsa, Chandrakant, Padmavathi and Kamalabai. Krishna Chavan died on 11.10.1959. After his death, property in Ward No. IV bearing CTS No.523 was succeeded by his two sons and his wife Neelubai as per mutation dated 30.03.1961. As far as property in Ward No.III bearing CTS No.610/7A, it was succeeded by his wife Neelubai as per mutation dated 12.07.1982. After the death of Neelubai, her legal representatives namely Vishwanathsa, Chandrakantsa, Padmavathi and Kamalabai succeeded said property as per Mutation dated 05.02.1983. It is contended that after the death of Kamalabai, her name was deleted from the mutation entry.

¶54

As the matter stood thus, the legal representatives of deceased Kamalabai filed an appeal before the DDLR challenging the mutation entries. There was a delay, hence an application was filed to condone the delay. Despite filing the objections, the DDLR without passing an order on the delay application, erroneously proceeded in the matter and passed orders on the merits of the case. On an appeal, the JDLR confirmed the order passed by the DDLR. This is unsustainable in law. The law is settled that when an application is filed

¶55

6 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:12127 WP No. 106334 of 2014

¶56

seeking condonation of delay, an order must be passed on the delay application. In the present case, the order on the delay was not passed, hence, the DDLR could not have proceeded further in the matter to consider the case on the merits. I may venture to say that the DDLR and the JDLR have failed to have regard to the relevant consideration and disregarded relevant matters. In my view, the orders passed by the DDLR and the JDLR are liable to be set aside. Accordingly, they are set aside.

¶57

The Writ of Certiorari is ordered. The order dated 17.01.2013 was passed by the Deputy Director of Land Records in � � �� vide Annexure-A and the order

¶58

dated 12.03.2014 passed by the Joint Director of Land Records in � � �� vide Annexure-B are quashed.

¶59

7. Resultantly, the Writ Petition is allowed.

¶60

Sd/(JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE

¶61

TKN

¶62

List No.: 2 Sl No.: 37

Tukkabai Chavan v. the Joint Director of Land Records

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tukkabai Chavan v. the Joint Director of Land Records

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt.Parvati W/O Prakash Sungar Vs the State of Karnataka

Huligemma W/O Channangouda Police Patil Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Ajay S/O: Devaji Bhatia Vs Bharat S/O: Devaji Bhatia

Sri. Irappa S/O Dakappa Pujari Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Gangabhai W/O Late Shanmukrao Desai Vs the State of Karnataka

Shri B M Risaldar Vs the State of Karnataka