IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR W.P.NO.2587/2012 (KLR-RR/SUR) BETWEEN:
1. SRI. SATYANARAYANA S/O LATE P. MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS.
2. SRI. NAGANNA S/O LATE P. MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS.
3. SMT. RATHNAMMA D/O LATE P. MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS.
4. SRI. LAKSHMANNA S/O LATE P. MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS.
5. SRI. D.M. RAMAKRISHNA S/O LATE P. MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS.
6. SMT. NAGAMMA D/O LATE P. MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS.
7. SRI. KRISHNAPPA S/O LATE P. MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS.
8. SRI. RAJANNA S/O LATE P. MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS.
9. SRI. D.M. NARAYANASWAMY S/O LATE P. MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS.
10. SRI. D.M. MNJUNATH S/O LATE P. MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS.
11. SMT. GIRIYAMMA W/O LATE P. MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS.
ALL ARE RESIDING AT DEVANAGODI VILLAGE & POST ANUGONDANAHALLI HOBLI HOSAKOTE TALUK BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT.
(BY SRI. A.G. SHIVANNA, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS REVENUE SECRETARY VIKASA SOUDHA DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BANGALORE – 560 001.
2. THAT THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BANGALROE RURAL DISTRICT VISHWESHWARA GOMMATA DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BANGALORE – 560 001.
3. THE TAHASILDAR HOSAKOTE TALUK HOSAKOTE BANGALORE RURAL DISTICT.
... PETITIONERS ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. Y.D. HARSHA, AGA) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER ANN-A, DATE.13.01.2012 PASSED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE RURAL DIST. MADE IN RP.NO.101/10-11 IN RESPECT OF THE LAND IN SY.NO.23/13 NEW NO.23/P14 MEASURING 1 AQCRE 20 GUNATS [NOW THE AUTHORITIES MENTIONED AS SY.NO.23] OF THARABALLI VILLAGE, JADIGENAHALLI HOBLI, HOSAKOTE TQ.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Petitioners have sought for quashing of order dated 13.01.2012-Annexure-A passed by second respondent whereunder it has been ordered to enter the name of Government in revenue records insofar as land bearing Sy.No.23 (old Sy.No.23/13 new No.23/P14) measuring 1 acre 20 guntas (though in the operative portion of impugned order it is mentioned as ‘1 acre 2 guntas’).
2. I have heard the arguments of Sri.A.G.Shivanna, learned counsel appearing for petitioners, Sri.Y.D.Harsha, learned AGA appearing for respondents/State. Original records which have been made available by learned AGA is also perused.
3. Proceedings under Section 136(3) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, was initiated by second respondent by exercising suo moto power to satisfy himself with regard to genuineness of the entries made in revenue records and as such show cause notice came to be issued to the petitioners on 14.09.2011 by the second respondent vide Annexure-B. Pursuant to same petitioners appeared before second respondent, filed objections on 26.11.2011-Annexure-C raising several grounds and sought for said proceedings being dropped. Agriculture land bearing Sy.No.23/13 (new No.23/P14) originally bearing Sy.No.9 was granted in favour of one Sri. Veerabadregowda on 11.05.1921 as per grant certificate and phodi thakte -Annexures-F and G. A perusal of same would disclose that land was granted to 11 members including said Sri.Veerabadregowda. On account of conditions of grant having not been fulfilled, proceedings was initiated and said land came to be auctioned and in the auction one Sri.Muniramanna purchased 10 acres of land in the said survey number as per auction proceedings records-Annexures-H and J. Above said Sri.Veerabadregowda had also released his rights in favour of Sri.Muniramanna as per Annexure-K. Thus, Sri.Muniramanna became absolute owner of the property bearing Sy.No.23, which was in his possession and enjoyment of the same during his lifetime.
4. The saguvali chit had also been issued by the Sub Divisional Officer, Doddaballapur, on 04.05.1928–Annexure-L and phodi thakthe was issued in the name of Sri.Muniramanna as per Annexure-M. Portions of said property were sold by Sri.Muniramanna and one such portion measuring 1 acre 20 guntas was sold in favour of one Sri.Gangaiah, s/o. Hanumaiah @ Forest Gangappa and Devanagondi Gangappa as per preliminary records maintained by the Office of Tahsildar Office - Annexure-N, which would evidence this fact. In the meanwhile, Sri.Muniramanna filed an Appeal No.78/29-30 before Deputy Commissioner for re-issuance of saguvali chit, which came to be allowed by Deputy Commissioner vide order dated 15.04.1930-
Annexure-O and thereby name of Sri.Muniramanna and vendor of petitioners’ forefathers continued in the preliminary record. Said Gangaiah in turn had sold said land measuring 1 acre 20 guntas under sale deed dated 21.04.1980-Annexure-D in favour of father of petitioners 1 to 10 and husband of 11th petitioner i.e., Sri.P.Muniyappa and accordingly, revenue records came to be mutated as per MR No.29/1980-81 and said P.Muniyappa, who was said to be in possession and enjoyment of property measuring 1 acre 20 guntas, had also obtained necessary electricity connection for the purpose of installing borewell. When this factual background existed, name of Sri.P.Muniyappa is said to have been rounded off in the revenue records for the year 1988-89 to 1992-93 as per Annexure-S and as such, a representation came to be submitted by the father of petitioners 1 to 10 and husband of 11th petitioner to third respondent, who verified the records and passed an order on 08.06.1999 in RRTCR 917/1998-99 directing to continue the entry in respect of land in question in the name of Sri.P.Muniyappa, which order is produced at Annexure-T and accordingly, name of Sri.P.Muniyappa continued in the revenue records from 1988-99.
5. During this interregnum period, land in question came to be acquired by KIADB and as such an application came to be filed by the petitioners for award of compensation in their favour, since they were the owners of land and asserting their title, they sought for payment of compensation. On petitioners being called upon to produce saguvali chit and other documents, same was submitted by the petitioners on 13.07.1999- Annexure-X and when said proceedings was pending, petitioners are said to have approached third respondent for correction of Sy.No.23/13 instead of 23/P14 on account of computerization of records having taken place during the year 2000-01 and Sy.No.23/13 having been changed as Sy.No.23/P14 and as such representation on 18.10.2002-Annexure-Y to third respondent had been submitted. Accordingly, third respondent by order dated 06.11.2002 in RRT CR 1304/2002-03 had corrected the mistake and had entered the name of Sri.Muniyappa in RTC and pahani as it was existing earlier. However, survey number had not been changed and computer entry depicted survey number as ‘23/P14’ instead of ‘23/13’. Hence, one more representation was submitted by petitioners on 18.10.2002 as per Annexure-Y.
6. On demise of Sri.Muniyappa on 14.01.2005, petitioners submitted a representation dated 10.01.2006-Annexure-Z to third respondent enclosing the death certificate of Muniyappa for mutating the revenue records in their names (petitioners) by way of inheritance khatha and thereafter revenue records were not mutated and matter has been pending before third respondent. On representation being submitted to jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner on 24.03.2008 by the petitioners to direct jurisdictional Tahsildar i.e., third respondent herein to mutate the revenue records in the name of petitioners, no steps were taken and at that juncture, second respondent initiated proceedings under Section 136(3) of Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 and has passed the impugned order dated 13.01.2012 to enter the name of “Government” in revenue records.
7. Original records made available by the learned AGA would disclose that grant was made in favour of Sri.Veerabadregowda and subsequently sold land measuring 1 acre 20 guntas by way of auction in favour of Sri.Muniramanna. Report of Office of third respondent clearly discloses that petitioners’ father Sri.Muniyappa having purchased said property on 21.04.1980 and accordingly revenue records was mutated in his name by M.R.No.29/1980-81 continued from 1983-84 to 1987-88. Said report dated 08.06.1999 would also disclose that petitioners were in possession, occupation and enjoyment of said land and name of Sri. Muniyappa had continued in column Nos.9 and 12 of RTC. Spot mahazar would also disclose these facts apart from original grant certificate disclosing above narrated facts.
8. In this background, learned Deputy Commissioner was not justified in arriving at a conclusion that for want of records the very grant in favour of predecessor in title to petitioners, is required to be held as one shrouded with mystery or there being a cloud over the title of petitioners. Said finding is erroneous, contrary to original records, which is now made available by learned AGA today for perusal of Court and same having been perused, the only irresistible conclusion which is to be drawn is that finding recorded by the Deputy Commissioner is contrary to facts and circumstances of present case. Hence, impugned order insofar as petitioners land are concerned, cannot be sustained.
9. For the reasons aforestated, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER (i) Writ petition is allowed.
(ii) Order dated 13.01.2012-Annexure-A passed in Revision Petition No.101/2010-11, insofar as, land bearing new Sy.No.23/13 measuring 1 acre 20 guntas situated at Tharaballi Village, Jadigenahalli Hobli, Hosakote Taluk, is set aside.
(iii) Third respondent is directed to effect the mutation entry in revenue records of above said land in the name of petitioners as they being the legal heirs of deceased P. Muniyappa, original owner of the property are entitled to succeed to said property by way of inheritance khatha.
Learned Government Advocate is permitted to file memo of appearance within four (4) weeks from today.
SD/- JUDGE DR