Allowed

Smt. L Geetha v. the Thasildar

Karnataka HC7 Mar 2024WP/14190/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Purchasers of shanbog land challenged cancellation of their sale deed and regrant to another, and dismissal of their restoration applications for dismissed KVOA appeals due to 125-day delay. The High Court condoned the delay on account of valuable rights at stake, quashed the impugned orders and restored both appeals.

What did the court decide?

Delay of 125 days condoned; restoration applications allowed; orders dated 22.04.2014 and 01.03.2017 quashed; MA(VOA)7/2007 and MA(VOA)6/2007 restored.

Smt. L Geetha Vs the Thasildar — Property and Title | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:11019 WP No. 14190 of 2017 C/W WP No. 14188 of 2017

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024 BEFORE

¶3

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 14190 OF 2017 (KVOA)

¶5

C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 14188 OF 2017 (KVOA)

¶6

IN WRIT PETITION NO. 14190 OF 2017:

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SMT. L GEETHA W/O KAMALAKAR, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/O LAKSHMIVENKATESHWARA KRUPA, 4TH MAIN ROAD, SHIVAMOOKAMBIKANAGARA, UPPARAHALLI, TUMKUR-572 102.

¶9

SRI K.S. MURTHAPPA S/O LATE K.M. SRIRAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS.

¶10

SRI.K.S. CHANDRASHEKAR S/O LATE K.M. SRIRAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS.

¶11

Digitally signed by B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

SRI K.S. RAVINDRAKUMAR S/O LATE K.M. SRIRAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS.

¶13

SRI K.S. SRINIVASAIAH S/O LATE K.M SRIRAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS.

¶14

SRI K.S. ASHWATHANARAYANA S/O LATE K.M. SRIRAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS.

¶15

SMT.K.S. LAKSHMIDEVAMMA W/O LATE SRINIVAS, D/O LATE K.M. SRIRAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,

¶16

PETITIONERS 2 TO 7 ARE R/O KODLAHALLI VILLAGE,

¶17

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:11019 WP No. 14190 of 2017 C/W WP No. 14188 of 2017

¶18

HOLAVANAHALLI HOBLI, KORATAGERE TQ, TUMKUR DISTRICT-572 121.

¶19

SMT.K.S. PARVATHAMMA W/O RANGANATHA, D/O LATE K.M SRIRAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/O KELAGINATHOTA, CHIKKABALLAPURA TOWN, CHIKKABALLAPUR DIST.

¶20

…PETITIONERS

¶21

(BY SRI. M B CHANDRACHOODA., ADVOCATE)

¶22

AND:

¶23

THE THASILDAR KORATAGERE TALUK, KORATAGERE, TUMKUR DISTRICT-572 121.

¶24

SRI K.S. KRISHNAPPA S/O K.SHAMARAO, AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS, R/AT NO.65, 2^ND A CROSS, 3^RD MAIN ROAD, SRINIVASANAGARA, BSK IST STAGE, BENGALURU-560 050.

¶25

…RESPONDENTS

¶26

(BY SRI. B RAVINDRANATH, AGA FOR R1; SRI. V VIJAYASHEKARA GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶27

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 22.04.2014 PASSED IN CASE NO. MA(VOA)7/2007 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT TUMAKURU VIDE ANNEXUREF AND THE ORDER DATED 01.03.2017 PASSED IN MISC.NO.5002/2017(MA(VOA)7/2007) ON THE FILE OF THE IV ADDL. DIST. & SESSIONS JUDGE AT MADHUGIRI VIDE ANNEXURE-K.

¶28

IN WRIT PETITION NO. 14188 OF 2017:

¶29

BETWEEN:

¶30

SMT. L GEETHA W/O KAMALAKAR, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/O LAKSHMIVENKATESHWARA KRUPA, 4^TH MAIN ROAD, SHIVAMOOKAMBIKANAGARA, UPPARAHALLI, TUMKUR-572 102.

¶31

SRI K.S. MURTHAPPA S/O LATE K.M. SRIRAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS.

¶32

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:11019 WP No. 14190 of 2017 C/W WP No. 14188 of 2017

¶33

SRI.K.S. CHANDRASHEKAR S/O LATE K.M. SRIRAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS.

¶34

SRI K.S. RAVINDRAKUMAR S/O LATE K.M. SRIRAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS.

¶35

SRI K.S. SRINIVASAIAH S/O LATE K.M SRIRAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS.

¶36

SRI K.S. ASHWATHANARAYANA S/O LATE K.M. SRIRAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS.

¶37

SMT.K.S. LAKSHMIDEVAMMA W/O LATE SRINIVAS, D/O LATE K.M. SRIRAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, PETITIONERS 2 TO 7 R/OF KODLAHALLI VILLAGE, HOLAVANAHALLI HOBLI, KORATAGERE TQ, TUMKUR DISTRICT-572 121.

¶38

SMT.K.S. PARVATHAMMA W/O RANGANATHA, D/O LATE K.M SRIRAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/O KELAGINATHOTA, CHIKKABALLAPURA TOWN, CHIKKABALLAPUR DIST.

¶39

…PETITIONERS

¶40

(BY SRI. M B CHANDRACHOODA, ADVOCATE)

¶41

AND:

¶42

THE THASILDAR KORATAGERE TALUK, KORATAGERE, TUMKUR DISTRICT-572 121.

¶43

SRI K.S. KRISHNAPPA S/O K. SHAMARAO, AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS, R/AT NO.65, 2^ND A CROSS,

¶44

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:11019 WP No. 14190 of 2017 C/W WP No. 14188 of 2017

¶45

3^RD MAIN ROAD, SRINIVASANAGARA, BSK 1^ST STAGE, BENGALURU-560 050.

¶46

…RESPONDENTS

¶47

(BY SRI. B RAVINDRANATH, AGA FOR R1; SRI. V VIJAYASHEKARA GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶48

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 22.4.2014 IN CASE NO.MA[VOA]6/2007 ON THE FILE OF THE IV ADDL. DIST & SESSIONS JUDGE AT MADHUGIRI VIDE ANNEXURE-F AND THE ORDER DATED 1.3.2017 PASSED ON THE FILE OF THE IV ADDL DIST AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT MADHUGIRI VIDE ANNEXURE-K.

¶49

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

¶50

ORDER

¶51

In W.P.No.14190/2017, the petitioners have challenged the order passed by the first respondent canceling the sale deed in favour of the petitioners, and the order dated 1.3.2017 passed by the 4^th Additional Disrict and Sessions Judge, Madhugiri in Misc.5002/2017 by which the application filed for restoration of the appeal in MA (VOA) 7/2007 was dismissed.

¶52

In W.P.No.14188/2017, the petitioners have challenged the order passed by the first respondent regranting the subject land and restoring the subject land in favour of the second respondent, and the order dated 1.3.2017 passed by the 4^th Additional Disrict and Sessions Judge, Madhugiri in Misc.5001/2017 by which the application filed for restoration of the appeal in MA (VOA) 7/2007 was dismissed.

¶53

The first respondent in exercise of power under Section 5 of the Karnataka Village Officers Abolition Act, regranted the land bearing Sy.No.82 situated at Kodlahalli Village, Koratagere Taluk, Tumkur District in favour of the second respondent in these petitions stating that the subject land is a shanbog land, and the order regranting the subject land in favour of the second respondent was challenged by

¶54

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:11019 WP No. 14190 of 2017 C/W WP No. 14188 of 2017

¶55

the petitioner herein by filing an appeal under Section 3(2) of the Karnataka Village Officers Abolition Act (for short 'the KVOA Act'). The appeal was dismissed for non prosecution on 22.04.2014.

¶56

The petitioners filed an application for restoration of the appeal on 10.10.2014. Learned District Judge dismissed the application for restoration stating that the petitioners have not offered plausible explanation. Hence, this petition.

¶57

Heard the learned counsels for the parties.

¶58

The petitioners claim to be the purchasers of land bearing Sy.No.82 measuring 3 acres from the wife of the grantee namely K.L.Narayana Rao. The first respondent regranted the subject land after cancelling the sale deed executed in favour of the petitioners. There was delay of more than 125 days in filing the application for restoration, and the first petitioner who was examined offered the explanation for the delay in filing the application for restoration. However, the explanation offered by the first petitioner was not accepted by the Trial Court, and the Trial Court passed the impugned order stating that no sufficient cause was shown for condoning the delay in filing the application for restoration.

¶59

Though sufficient cause was not shown by the first petitioner for the delay, however, valuable rights of the petitioner has been adversely affected by the order of the grant made in favour of the second respondent in respect of the subject land and if the appeal is not restored, the rights of the petitioner over the subject property will be adversely affected. Therefore, it would be appropriate to restore the appeal after condoning the delay 125 days in filing the application for restoration. Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶60

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:11019 WP No. 14190 of 2017 C/W WP No. 14188 of 2017

¶61

ORDER

¶62

i. The writ petitions are allowed.

¶63

ii. In W.P.No.14190/2017, the impugned order dated 22.04.2014 passed by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Tumakuru in MA(VOA)7/2007 and the order dated 01.03.2017 passed in Misc.Nos.5002/2017 on the file of the IV Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Madhugiri at Annexure-K are hereby quashed and the application filed by the petitioners for restoration of the appeal is hereby allowed.

¶64

iii. In W.P.No.14188/2017, the impugned order dated 22.04.2014 passed by the IV Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Madhugiri in MA(VOA)6/2007 and the order dated 01.03.2017 passed in Misc.Nos.5001/2017 on the file of the IV Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Madhugiri at Annexure-K is hereby quashed and the application filed by the petitioners for restoration of the appeal is allowed.

¶65

iv. Appeals in MA(VOA)7/2007 and MA(VOA)6/2007 are restored to its file.

¶66

v. Learned District judge to proceed and pass appropriate order in accordance with law after notifying all the parties.

¶67

Sd/JUDGE

¶68

RKA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31

Smt. L Geetha v. the Thasildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. L Geetha v. the Thasildar

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 E Amarnath Vs the Regional Transport Authority

Sri. Partha G.N. Vs the Chairman

Sri Ramappa Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Thanuja Nayaka a Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Anand B Patil Vs State of Karnataka

Sri H Gangappa Vs the State of Karnataka