1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 16 th DAY OF OCTOBER, 2012
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM MOHAN REDDY
WRIT PETITION NO.64203/2010 (KLR-RES)
BETWEEN :
1. SMT. TAYAVVA W/O. CHANNAVEERAPPA KOPPAD AGE: 65 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE R/O. MADANBHAVI, TQ: DHARWAD
2. SMT. DYAMAVVA W/O. PUNDALIKAPPA MELAVANKI AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE R/O. KURAKI MADANBHAVI, TQ: BAILHONGAL DIST: BELGAUM NOW AT MADANABHAVI, TQ: DHARWAD
3. SMT. BASAVVA, W/O. BASAPPA JANTLI AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE R/O. INDIRANAGAR, BAILHONGAL DIST: BELGAUM, NOW AT MADANABHAVI TQ: DHARWAD
4. SMT. MANJULA, W/O. PRAKASH KOTAGI AGE: 38 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE R/O. RANICHENNAMMA CIRCLE, KITTUR TQ: BAILHONGAL, DIST: BELGAUM
5. SRI. MADIVALAPPA, S/O. CHANNABEERAPPA KOPPAD AGE: 23 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE R/O. MADANBHAVI, TQ: DHARWAD. … PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SADIQ N. GOODWALA, ADV.) 2
AND:
1. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DHARWAD, DIST: DHARWAD
2. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER DHARWAD, DIST: DHARWAD
3. VILLAGE ACCOUNTANT GAGE – DIVISION TAHASILDAR OFFICE – DHARWAD
4. SRI. MALLAPPA, S/O. BASAVANNEPPA KOPPAD AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRICULTURE R/O. MADANBHAVI VILLAGE TQ. AND DIST: DHARWAD …RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. S. R. HEGDE, ADV. FOR R4 R1 – R3 – SERVED) ---
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 04.05.2010 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 IN NO.RTS.RA.CR.13/2009-10 VIDE ANNEXURE-C AND ORDER DATED 05.05.2006 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.3 IN M.R.NO.19/05-06 VIDE ANNEXURE-A.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The 4 th respondent instituted O.S.No.50/2004 before the Civil Court for declaration, partition and separate possession of the immovable property in question, which when allowed and a preliminary decree 3
drawn made a representation to the jurisdictional
Tahasildar informing him about the acquisition of rights, following which the Tahasildar by mutation entry
No.19/2005-06 recorded the name of the 4 th respondent in the revenue records.
2. Petitioners filed an appeal invoking Section
136(2) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 (‘the
Act’ for short) before the Assistant Commissioner, calling in question the mutation entry No.19/2005-06, which when allowed and the mutation entry set aside, the 4 th respondent filed a Revision Petition under
Section 136(3) of the Act before the Deputy
Commissioner, Dharwad. The Revising Authority, having regard to the preliminary decree, set aside the order of the Assistant Commissioner by allowing the
Revision Petition by order dated 04.05.2010 Annexure
‘C’. Hence this petition. 4
3. Reserving liberty to the petitioners to make a representation to the Revenue Authorities in the event of success in the pending Regular First Appeal calling in question the judgment and preliminary decree in
O.S.No.50/2004, which the authorities, without doubt would consider and accordingly, make entries in the mutation register, this petition is ordered accordingly.
SD/- JUDGE gab/-