Disposed

Smt Indumathi v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC10 Apr 2024WP/1711/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition under ULC proceedings seeking that appeal records in RA/ULC 53/1996-97 be forwarded to the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal. As the petitioner had not filed any appeal before the Tribunal, the court disposed of the petition reserving liberty to file an appeal.

What did the court decide?

Liberty reserved to petitioner to file appeal before Karnataka Appellate Tribunal; KAT may secure records from respondent offices if appeal is filed.

Smt Indumathi Vs State of Karnataka — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:14602 WP No. 1711 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR WRIT PETITION NO. 1711 OF 2023 (ULC)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SMT. INDUMATHI, D/O LATE B.M. KESHAVA RAO, AGED 59 YEARS R/AT FLAT NO.G-1, CHAITHANYA APARTMENTS, OPP TO GUJARTHI SCHOOL, ALAKE, MANGALORE, D.K. DISTRICT - 575 001.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SMT. N. SHWETHA NAYAK, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. DHANANJAY KUMAR, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

STATE OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE - 560 001.

¶12

Digitally signed by B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶13

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, D.K. DISTRICT, MANGALORE TALUK, D.K. - 575 001.

¶14

REGIONAL COMMISSIONER, MYSORE DIVISION, MYSORE - 570 001.

¶15

…RESPONDENTS

¶16

(BY SMT. HEMALATHA V, AGA FOR R1 TO R3)

¶17

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION MADE BY THE PETITIONER DATED 07.07.2022 AND 14.10.2022 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND A1 AND DIRECT THE R3 TO SEND ALL APPEAL

¶18

¶19

NC: 2024:KHC:14602 WP No. 1711 of 2023

¶20

PAPERS IN RA/ULC/53/1996-97 TO KARNATAKA APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE FOR THE DISPOSAL OF THE APPEAL.

¶21

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

¶22

ORDER

¶23

The petitioner is seeking for a direction to the 3^rd respondent to forward all the records in RA/ULC 53/96-97 to the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore.

¶24

The learned AGA submits that, the appeal having not been filed before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore, the request of the petitioner cannot be accepted.

¶25

The petitioner has not filed an appeal before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore challenging the order passed by the then competent Authority declaring that the declarant-Sri.M.Keshava Rao was holding excess vacant land.

¶26

Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed off reserving liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore, and if such an appeal is filed, the KAT is at liberty to secure the concerned records from the office of 2^nd respondent/3^rd respondent.

¶27

Sd/JUDGE

¶28

JS/-

Smt Indumathi v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Indumathi v. State of Karnataka

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. v. Ramesh Reddy, Vs Mr. Noor Ahmad

M.B.Suresh Vs State by Kadur Police

Mr. Antony Praveen Dsouza Vs Sri Shrinivas

Gangappa Gowda Vs State of Karnataka

Mr. Uttam Kumar K Vs State of Karnataka

I Workz Automotive Pvt. Ltd. Vs Bengaluru Electricity Company