Venkataraman Vs the State of Karnataka

SRI V DWARAKANATH S/O LATE V S ANNAJI RANGA RAO AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.2402/3 IST CROSS, BANASHANKARI LAYOUT PAVAGADA TOWN TUMKUR DISTRICT PIN-561202.

¶22

PETITIONERS NO.1 TO 4 ARE REPRESENTED BY THEIR GPA HOLDER PETITIONER NO.5 SRI V DWARAKATH

¶23

SMT.GOWRAMMA W/O SRIKANTAPPA AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS R/O 3RD CROSS, BOVI COLONY KOTANAYAKANAHALLI TIPTUR RURAL TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572201. (AMENDED V/C/O DTD:12.06.2024)

¶24

…PETITIONERS

¶25

(BY SRI. VIJAYA KUMAR K, ADVOCATE)

¶26

AND:

¶27

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS REVENUE DEPARTMENT REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY M S BUILDING BENGALURU-560001.

¶28

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:50492 WP No. 17640 of 2021

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

CNR: KAHC010356302021

¶31

LAND TRIBUNAL BANGARPET TALUK (NOW KGF TALUK) KOLAR DISTRICT PIN-563114.

¶32

S M GURRAPPA

¶33

SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS

¶34

SRI SATHYANARAYANA S/O LATE S M GURRAPPA AND LATE MUNLAKSHMAMMA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS.

¶35

SMT PADMA W/O LATE MANJUNATH DAUGHTER IN LAW OF LATE S M GURRAPPA AND LATE MUNILAKSHMAMMA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS.

¶36

RESPONDENT NOS.3 AND 4 ARE RESIDING AT SUNDARAPALYA VILLAGE KYASAMBALLI HOBLI KGF TALUK -563116.

¶37

…RESPONDENTS

¶38

(BY SMT.H V SHARADA, AGA, FOR R1 AND R2 SRI K BALAKRISHNA, ADVOCATE FOR R3 & R4)

¶39

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DTD 05.04.2003, PASSED BY THE R-2 LAND TRIBUNAL IN CASE NO.TRB/61, 97/1998-99 AND 51/992000 VIDE ANNX-A HOLDING THE SAME AS ILLEGAL.

¶40

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN `B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶41

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH

¶42

4 -

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

NC: 2026:KHC:50492 WP No. 17640 of 2021

¶45

CNR: KAHC010356302021

¶46

ORAL ORDER

¶47

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

¶48

2. The petitioners in this writ petition are assailing

¶49

the order dated 05.04.2003 (Annexure - A) passed by the respondent No.2 - Land Tribunal.

¶50

3. It is contended by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, by referring to the cause title in the impugned order at Annexure - A, that, no notice has been issued to the petitioners herein, and further, the grand father of the petitioner Nos.1, 4 and 5 herein - Sri V Srinivas Rao was no more as on the date of passing of the order, and therefore, argued that, fair opportunity has to be extended to the petitioners in the light of the judgment of this Court in the case of Lokayya

¶51

Poojary and another vs State of Karnataka and others reported in ILR 2012 Kar 4345, and therefore, sought for interference of this Court.

¶52

5 -

¶53

HC-KAR

¶54

NC: 2026:KHC:50492 WP No. 17640 of 2021

¶55

CNR: KAHC010356302021

¶56

4. Per contra , Sri K Balakrishna, learned counsel

¶57

appearing for the respondent Nos.3 and 4 submitted that, notice has been served to the petitioners herein, and therefore submitted that, the order impugned is just and proper which requires to be confirmed.

¶58

5. Learned Additional Government Advocate

¶59

appearing for respondents No.1 and 2 also sought to justify the impugned order.

¶60

6. In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, on careful consideration of the impugned order at Annexure-A would indicate that, no notice has been served to the petitioners herein, and that apart, Form No.7A (Annexues-J1 and J2) said to have been filed by the original applicant, S M Gurappa, and therefore, I am of the view that, the matter requires to be reconsidered by the respondent No.2-Land Tribunal, afresh after affording an opportunity to all the

¶61

6 -

¶62

HC-KAR

¶63

NC: 2026:KHC:50492 WP No. 17640 of 2021

¶64

CNR: KAHC010356302021

¶65

parties concerned, in the light of the judgment of this

¶66

Court, in the case of Lokayya Poojary (supra).

¶67

Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶68

ORDER

¶69

i) The writ petition is allowed.

¶70

ii) The order dated 05.04.2003 (Annexure-A) passed by the respondent No.2 is accordingly set aside.

¶71

iii) The matter is remitted to the respondent No.2 to reconsider the issue afresh after considering the observations made above.

¶72

iv) In order to avoid further delay in the matter, the parties are directed to appear before the respondent No.2 on 27.10.2026 at 03.00 pm. Since the petitioners herein have not been impleaded in the original proceedings, it is open for the private respondents/applicants herein to

¶73

7 -

¶74

HC-KAR

¶75

NC: 2026:KHC:50492 WP No. 17640 of 2021

¶76

CNR: KAHC010356302021

¶77

implead the petitioners in proceedings before the respondent No.2.

¶78

SD/(E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE

¶79

BKM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 49

Venkataraman v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Venkataraman 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases