IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JULY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S.N.SATYANARAYANA WRIT PETITION NO.6131/2013(LR-SEC 48A) BETWEEN SMT CHENNAMMA SHEDTHY W/O LATE NARAYANA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 79 YEARS R/O ‘GANESHA NILAYA’, TANTRADI, MANDARTI POST KADUR VILLAGE UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY HER GPA HOLDER K. GOVINDA SHETTY S/O LATE NARAYANA SHETTY R/O ‘GANESHA NILAYA’ TANTRADI, MANDARTI POST KADUR VILLAGE UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT-576 230 (BY SRI NAGARAJA HEGDE, ADVOCATE) AND 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE M S BUILDING BANGALORE-560001 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY ... PETITIONER 2. LAND TRIBUNAL UDUPI TALUK-576 230 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY 3. THASILDAR UDUPI DISTRICT UDUPI-576 230 4. U NARAYANA SHETTY S/O LATE MADAIAH HEGDE SINCE DEAD BY LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES 4(a) BEECHAMMA SHEDTHY W/O LATE NARAYANA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 88 YEARS 4(b) SHAMBHAVI SHEDTHY D/O LATE NARAYANA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS 4(c) SHANTHI SHEDTHY D/O LATE NARAYANA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS 4(d) ANUSHA SHEDTHY D/O LATE NARAYANA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS 4(e) SHALINI SHEDTHY D/O LATE NARAYANA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS 4(f) BHARATHI SHEDTHY D/O LATE NARAYANA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS 4(g) SHASHIDHAR SHETTY S/O LATE NARAYANA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS 4(h) SATHISH KUMAR SHETTY D/O LATE NARAYANA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS ALL ARE RESIDING AT KADUR VILLAGE, KOKKARNE UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT – 576 101 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.B.P.RADHA, AGA FOR R1 TO R3, R4(a) to (h) ARE SERVED BUT REMAIN UNREPRESENTED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE APPLICATION SAID TO HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT, UNDER FORM NO.7 IN RESPECT OF THE BEARING SY.NO.164/1B MEASURING 20 CENTS & 164/3 MEASURING 3 ACRES 48 CENTS, RESPECTIVELY, SITUATED AT KADOORU VILLAGE, KOTA HOBLI, UDUPI TQ. AS PER ANNEXURE-A.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The petitioner herein is seeking a writ of certiorari to quash the application alleged to have filed by deceased 4th respondent in Form No.7 (dated 27.12.1976 subsequently altered as 15.12.1976) on the file of Land Tribunal, Udupi, seeking occupancy right in respect of land bearing Sy.No.164/1B measuring 20 cents and Sy.No.164/3 measuring 3 acres 48 cents, situated at Kadooru village, Kota Hobli, Udupi Taluk, a copy of which is at Annexure-A.
2. The grievance of the petitioner is that, 4th respondent had initially filed an application in Form No.7 on 30.2.1974 seeking occupancy right in respect of lands bearing (1) Sy.No.43/3 measuring 62 cents, (2) Sy.No.46 measuring 3 acres 1 cent and (3) Sy.No.46/2 measuring 1 acre 37 cents situated at Kadoor village, Udupi Taluk, Dakshina Kannada District. According to the petitioner, the said proceedings registered in No.LRY-24\23\113\TRI- 638/1978-79 was considered favorably by Land Tribunal, Udupi, by its order dated 21.4.1979, which is at Annexure-C to this writ petition.
3. It is not in dispute that the petitioner has conceded to the tenancy right granted in favour of 4th respondent in respect of aforesaid three lands. However, it is his grievance that subsequently, after the cut off date, the applicant has filed another application seeking occupancy right in respect of lands bearing Sy.No.164/3 measuring to an extent 3 acres 48 cents and Sy.No.164/1B measuring to an extent of 20 cents in addition to 3 lands for which his application was already considered. This application, according to the petitioner, is inserted in the original records with ulterior motive; while doing so, the date of his application which is shown as 27.12.1976 is after correcting the earlier date 15.12.1976 and though the application is said to be inserted on that day, on the said application the very same number under which his earlier application was considered is mentioned i.e., LRY.24-24, 113-TRI-638/1978- 79.
4. Admittedly, no proceedings are initiated pursuant to the subsequent application of the 4th respondent dated 27.12.1976, inasmuch as the number which is shown to this application is the number under which the application of the 4th respondent is considered on 21.4.1979. In that view of the matter, this Court would observe that the application dated 27.12.1976 is an application without any basis and the same appears to be inserted at a subsequent date after the application of the very same applicant was considered for remaining 3 lands by order dated 29.12.1978.
5. With such observations, this writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE nd/-