In the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore

1 W.P.No.38129/09 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 03RD DAY OF JUNE 2014 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAM MOHAN REDDY WRIT PETITION No.38129/2009 (SC/ST) BETWEEN: SMT.ANJANADEVI, W/O LATE V.RANGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/AT NO.131, 15 TH CROSS, 11 TH BLOCK, R.T.NAGAR, BANGALORE – 32. …PETITIONER (BY SRI DEVIPRASAD SHETTY, ADV.) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE DISTRICT, BANGALORE. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE SOUTH SUB-DIVISION, BANGALORE. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, ANEKAL TALUK, ANEKAL. 4. SMT.CHINNAMMA, W/O LATE CHIKKA CHOWDANA BOYI, VADDARAPALYA, ATTIBELE HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK. 5. SHRI T.SUDHAKAR, S/O SANJEEVARAYUDU, NERALUR VILLAGE, ATTIBELE HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI I.THARANATH POOJARY, AGA FOR R-1 TO R-3; Ms.ANUSHA ASUNDI, ADV. FOR SRI A.MADHUSUDAN RAO, ADV. FOR R-4; SRI A.C.BALARAJ, ADV. FOR R-5.) 2 W.P.No.38129/09 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 03.07.2009 PASSED BY THE R-1 AT ANX-G. THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: O R D E R On 02.06.2014, the following order was passed. “The following facts are not in dispute: The Grantee – deceased husband of the 4th respondent, belonged to the ‘Scheduled Tribe’ and was granted the land in question on 30.1.1982. That land was conveyed to 5 th respondent under a sale deed dated 16.11.1996 registered on 9.3.1998, while permission under sub-section [2] of section 4 of the KarnataKa Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes [Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands] Act, 1978, was accorded by the Authorities on 17.12.1997 and 30.12.1997 Annexures-B & B1. The second sale by the 5 th respondent in favour of the petitioner was on 23.12.2004. The question is whether the first sale dated 16.11.1996 was void in the absence of permission on the date of execution of the sale deed. 3 W.P.No.38129/09 Learned Counsel for the petitioner seeKs a day’s accommodation. List on 3.6.2014.” 2. Having heard the learned Counsel for parties, perused the pleadings and examined the orders of the Assistant Commissioner and that of the Deputy Commissioner in appeal, undoubtedly, the sale deed dated 16.11.1996, Annexure-A, executed by respondent No.4 and her children, the legal representatives of the deceased grantee in favour of the 5 th respondent conveying the granted land records the acKnowledgment of sale consideration of Rs.1,80,000/- and delivery of possession of the said property on the very same day. If regard is had to Section 4 of the KarnataKa Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978, the transfer when effected on 16.11.1996 by the legal representatives of the deceased grantee in favour of 5 th respondent transferring the granted land without the prior permission or approval of the State Government, cannot but be held to be void 4 W.P.No.38129/09 and illegal. The instrument of sale dated 16.11.1996 when registered on 09.03.1998, after the permission was accorded on 17.12.1997 and 30.12.1997, the said permission operates as post facto permission, not contemplated by the Act. The post facto permission accorded on 17.12.1997, Annexure-B of the Assistant Commissioner and that of the Deputy Commissioner on 30.12.1997, Annexure-B1 does not come to the aid of the petitioner, the second purchaser of the granted land. 3. In the circumstances, petition devoid of merit, is rejected . Sd/- JUDGE Kcm .

Load more