IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2017 B E F O R E THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.N. SATYANARAYANA WRIT PETITION NO.3032 OF 2017 (LR-RES) BETWEEN:
SRI K.ANANTHA BHAT S/O K VASUDEVA BHAT AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS R/AT NEAR KADRI TEMPLE KADRI TEMPLE ROAD, KADRI POST MANGALORE – 575 003 … PETITIONER (BY SRI CHANDRASHEKAR ACHAR, ADV.) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS UNDER SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE M S BUILDING, BANGALORE – 560 001 2. SRI DEJU POOJARI S/O DEVU POOJARI AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS R/AT SANKESHA OF DERABAIL VILLAGE MANGALORE – 575 006 … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI S.S.MAHENDRA, AGA FOR R1) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 29.04.2016 IN PROCEEDINGS PASSED BY THE LAND TRIBUNAL, MANGALORE VIDE ANNEXURE – G AND QUASH THE ORDER DATED 31.12.1981 PASSED BY THE LAND TRIBUNAL, MANGALORE AS PER ANNEXURE – D AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION IS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The petitioner herein Sri K. Anantha Bhat is said to be son of Smt.Jalajakshiamma W/o K. Vasudev Bhat, respondent in LRT No.4667/81-82 on the file of Land Tribunal – II, Mangalore Taluk. His grievance is that in the aforesaid proceedings initiated by 2nd respondent herein, 2nd respondent sought occupancy rights in respect of Sy. Nos.145 and 145B, to an extent of 12 cents and in Sy. Nos.119-1 and 119-1C, to an extent of 8 cents, totally 20 cents of land, in the said proceedings against the petitioner’s mother. According to him, the said application was disposed of by Order dated 31.12.1981, without notice to the respondent therein and subsequently a correction was carried out to the said order on 29.04.2016 by passing further order in the disposed of matter and it is stated that notice was not served on the respondent even while passing further order in the said proceedings which was revived for the second time in the form of a correction.
2. The grievance of the petitioner is that in the original order dated 31.12.1981 as well as modified order dated 29.04.2016 what is granted in favour of 2nd respondent is 8 cents of land in Sy. No.119/C1 and 12 cents of land in Sy. No.140/5 as against the prayer of 2nd respondent in his Form-7 for aforesaid four numbers as stated supra. Therefore, these two orders are challenged firstly on the ground that the said orders are passed against his mother when she was alive without serving notice to her and secondly, the subsequent modified order passed on 29.04.2016 was without notice to her legal representatives.
3. Though the said submission of petitioner does not draw strength from the material available on record, what is seen in the application in Form-7 is not the land which is considered for issuance of occupancy certificate in the Order dated 31.12.1981 and even in the modified order dated 29.04.2016, clearly indicating that the 2nd respondent herein is given occupancy certificate in respect of land for which 2nd respondent did not file application. Therefore, both the Orders do not survive for consideration.
Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and the two orders are set aside and the matter is remanded for the Tribunal for fresh consideration, after issuing notice to the petitioner who is legal heir of deceased Jalajakshiamma, respondent in the said proceedings, and also issuing fresh notice to the applicant in the said proceedings namely 2nd respondent herein.
Sd/- JUDGE sac*