J.M. EBRAHIM Vs. D. KRISHNAPPA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) STEPS has been taken to Respondent No. 1(a) and Respondent No. 1(c) more than twice. In the light of the endorsements of the postal department service on the Respondent No. 1(a) and Respondent No. 1(c) is held sufficient and the Respondents remained absent. Respondents No. 1(a) to 1(c) remained absent. By consent of the counsel for the Petitioner and the Government Counsel the petitions are taken for disposal. The order sought to be assailed is one dated 26.10.1976 passed in LRF (A) G1/1379/1974 -75 by the 2nd Respondent Land Tribunal.

(2.) IT is contended that the Petitioner is the owner of Sy. No. 67 measuring 1 -20 acres. The land stood in the name of his father as shown in the Pahani. After the death of his father the land stood in the name of his eldest son Habibulla. After the death of Habibulla the Petitioner succeeded. During the relevant period 1973 -74 one Sri Doddayellappa Bagur has taken the land on mortgage for cultivating casurina trees and it was not tenanted to any of the persons mentioned in the tenants column in the Record of Rights. This Bagur Doddayellappa is different from Gundur Doddayellappa. But Gundur Doddayellappa taking advantage of the similarity in name filed an application in Form No. 7 and claimed occupancy rights. But the second Respondent had granted occupancy rights without notice to the Petitioner. After the death of Doddayellappa his son the first Respondent is enjoying the suit land as occupant.

(3.) ON this ground the order is sought to be attacked.