Disposed

Smt Siraj Unnisa v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC21 Jun 2024WP/4357/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed for direction to revenue authorities to consider representations regarding entry of Pouthi Katha in the name of the petitioner claiming inheritance right in disputed land. Court ordered respondent to consider representations within three months.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondent No.4 (Tahsildar) to consider petitioner's representations and revenue authority report within three months.

Smt Siraj Unnisa Vs the State of Karnataka — Specific Performance | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

NC: 2024:KHC:22470 WP NO.4357 OF 2024

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 21^ST DAY OF JUNE, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.4357 OF 2024 (KLR-RR/SUR)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SMT. SIRAJ UNNISA W/O LATE BASHA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/AT MAGADIPALYA, KOPPA VILLAGE, YADIYURU HOBLI, KUNIGAL TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT -572 130.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. NAIK NARAYAN MASTAPPA, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶13

Digitally signed by ARUNKUMAR M S Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶14

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER TUMAKURU,

¶15

TUMKURU DISTRICT - 572 101.

¶16

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER TUMAKURU SUB-DIVISION TUMAKURU - 572 101.

¶17

THE TAHSILDAR KUNIGAL TALUK, TUMKURU DISTRICT - 572 130. …RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SMT. B.P. RADHA, AGA)

¶19

¶20

NC: 2024:KHC:22470 WP NO.4357 OF 2024

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATIONS DATED 22^ND NOVEMBER, 2014, 19^TH FEBRUARY, 2019 AND 20^TH JUNE, 2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENTS 3 AND 4 VIDE ANNEXURES 'M', 'Q' AND 'R' AS PER THE REPORT OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES PRODUCED AT ANNEXURES 'U', 'V', 'W' AND 'X' AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO ENTER THE POUTHI KATHA IN THE NAME OF PETITIONER WITH RESPECT TO LAND MEASURING 4-00 ACRES IN SURVEY NO.56 OF THIPPURU VILLAGE, YEDIYURU HOBLI, KUNIGAL TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT; AND ETC.

¶22

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

¶23

O R D E R

¶24

The grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is with regard to non-consideration of representations dated 22^nd November, 2014 (Annexure-M), 19^th February, 2019 (Annexure-Q), and 20^th June, 2020 (Annexure-R) in terms of the report made by the revenue authorities as produced at Annexures 'U', 'V', 'W' and 'X'.

¶25

Heard Sri. Naik Narayan Mastappa, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt. B.P. Radha, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents.

¶26

Having taken note of the factual aspects on record, as the petitioner is claiming the right through inheritance in

¶27

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:22470 WP NO.4357 OF 2024

¶28

respect of the land in question, the respondent No.4-Tahsildar is hereby directed to consider the representations made by the petitioner dated 22^nd November, 2014 (Annexure-M), 19^th February, 2019 (Annexure-Q), and 20^th June, 2020 (AnnexureR) in terms of report made by the revenue authorities produced at Annexures 'U', 'V', 'W' and 'X' within an outer limit of three months from the date of receipt of this order. Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of.

¶29

SD/JUDGE

¶30

ARK

Smt Siraj Unnisa v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Siraj Unnisa v. the 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 D S Krishnegowda Vs Deputy Commissioner

Sri. Praveena Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Somashekar K Vs the State of Karnataka

Kempegowda Vs the State of Karnataka

The Management Director Vs the Joint Director of Land Records

Sri Ramakrishnappa Vs the State of Karnataka