T G THIMMARAYA GOWDA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is seeking to quash the impugned order at annexureh, dated 23-6-1995 passed by the 2nd respondent-assistant commissioner granting permission to respondents 3 to 5 for alienating 2 acres, 14 guntas of land in sy. No. 37 of thonachanakuppe village of nelamangala hobli on certain grounds. The facts and the grounds raised as also the contentions urged need not be traversed because the writ petition is liable to be dismissed on several grounds.

(2.) IN paragraph 2 of the statement of objections filed on behalf of 4th respondent it is stated that after obtaining permission under the impugned order for alienating the land in question, respondents 3 to 5 executed absolute sale deed in favour of the purchaser, km. Ranganna on 21-7-1995. It is further stated that the petitioner and his son garaju are consenting witnesses and the relevant portion of the recitals in the sale deed has been extracted. It is further stated that the petitioner was paid major sale consideration and the petitioner by suppressing all these facts has filed this writ petition.

(3.) FROM the statements made in the counter filed on behalf of 4th respondent it is clear that petitioner was aware of the sale of the land in favour of k. m. ranganna as far back as in the year 1995 itself. He has not denied the sale deed, copy of which is produced as Annexure-rl. He has also not denied that he was a consenting party to the said sale deed. But the petitioner has failed to bring the said fact to the notice of this court. Therefore, the petition is liable to be dismissed for suppression of an important fact.