IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU ON THE 11TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. G. PANDIT WRIT APPEAL NO.1383 OF 2016 (LR-SEC.48A) BETWEEN:
HARISHCHANDRA HEGDE SON OF SHRIMATHI HEGGADATHI AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS RESIDING AT MARNE VILLAGE KARKALA TALUK UDUPI DISTRICT PIN-574 124.
... APPELLANT (BY SRI SANATHKUMAR SHETTY K, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT REVENUE DEPARTMENT M S BUILDING BENGALURU -560001 2. THE CHAIRMAN LAND TRIBUNAL KARKALA KARKALA TALUK UDUPI DISTRICT PIN-574124.
3. KITTI SHEDTHI (SINCE DECEASED) BY LRS 3(1).ASHOKHA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS SON OF LATE KITTI SHEDTHI 3(2).MOHINI AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS DAUGHTER OF LATE KITTI SHEDTHI 3(3).SAROJINI AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS DAUGHTER OF LATE KITTI SHEDTHI RESPONDENT NOS.3(1) TO 3(3) ARE RESIDING AT THOTADA MANE HOUSE MARNE VILLAGE POST:AJEKAR, KARKAL TALUK UDUPI DISTRICT PIN-574124.
4. KARIYA SHETTY SINCE DECEASED BY LRS 4(a).SUNANDA SHETTY WIFE OF LATE KARIYA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS 4(b).SUGANDTHI SHETTY DAUGHTER OF LATE KARIYA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS 4(c).SUDHA DAUGHTER OF LATE KARIYA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS 4(d).SUJATHA DAUGHTER OF LATE KARIYA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS 4(e).SHARADA DAUGHTER OF LATE KARIYA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS 4(f). USHA DAUGHTER OF LATE KARIYA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS 4(g).SANTHOSH SON OF LATE KARIYA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS 4(h).PRASAD SON OF LATE KARIYA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS RESPONDENTS Nos.4(a) TO 4(h) ARE RESIDING AT MARNE VILLAGE AND POST KARKALA TALUK UDUPI DISTRICT PIN-574124.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. R ANITHA, HCGP. FOR RESPONDENT Nos.1 AND 2) THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED IN THE WRIT PETITION No. 28727/2011 DATED 30/9/2015.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, S.G.PANDIT J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT The petitioner is before this Court in this appeal being aggrieved by the order dated 30.09.2015 of the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.28727 of 2011 by which, the writ petition was rejected for delay and latches.
2. The petitioner is son of the land lady who filed writ petition challenging the land Tribunal’s order dated 07.05.1999 in LT.309/1981-82 conferring occupancy rights in respect of several lands in favour of third respondent. The writ petition was filed on 20th July 2011.
3. On an earlier occasion, the mother of the petitioner had filed Writ Petition No.840 of 1992 which was remanded to the Land Tribunal by the order dated 17.06.1993. The petitioner in his writ petition has stated that he came to know about the order granting occupancy rights in favour of respondent No.3 only when they tried to interfere with the possession of the petitioner over the lands in question. The same cannot be accepted as the proceedings before the Tribunal was at the instance of the petitioner’s mother. The delay of nearly 12 years in filing the writ petition is not explained properly. The learned Single Judge on taking note of the reasons assigned for the delay has observed that the petitioner’s mother had knowledge of proceedings before the Land Tribunal and she has not questioned the same during her life time she has accepted the order. The petitioner, son of the landlady is before this Court in this writ petition after more than 11 years from the date of order of the Tribunal, without explaining acceptable reasons for the delay. The petitioner has not assigned any reasons much less proper reasons for the delay. The learned Single Judge has rightly rejected the writ petition. Hence, we are of the view that the appellant has not made out any good ground to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge. Accordingly, the writ appeal is dismissed.
Sd/- Sd/-
JUDGE JUDGE mpk/-* CT:bms