SHIVAPPA TAMMANNAPPA KARABAN Vs. PARASAPPA HANAMMAPPA KURABAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by special leave arises from the judgment of the High court of Karnataka in RSA No. 998 of 1977 dated 27/1/1988 affirming the judgments and decrees of the District Judge, Bijapur in Regular Appeal No. 11 of 1973 and of Munsif, Bagalkot in OS No. 23 of 1968 dated 3/4/1973 under Karnataka Village Offices (Abolition) Act, 1961 (Act No. 14 of 1961, for short 'the Act'. The appellant who was unsuccessful throughout is recorded as a holder of an office as Walikarki but he is granted l/5th share in the plaint schedule properties while the respondents have been granted 4/5th towards their respective shares. His grievance is that he had to get the entire plaint schedule properties. Section 2 (b) defines thus:

(2.) "Unauthorised holder" as defined in clause (m) means,"a person in possession of a land granted or continued in respect of or annexed to a village office by the State without any right, or under any lease, mortgage, sale, gift or any other kind of alienation thereof, which is null and void under the existing law, relating to such village office. "

(3.) "Village office" is defined in clause (n) , the relevance of which is not material for the purpose of this case. Section 3 gives the power of Deputy Commissioner to decide certain questions and appeals arising therefrom. Sub-section (1 says: "if any question arises-