R.A.PRADEEP Vs. N.MURARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant has filed I.A.No.1/2017 seeking condonation of delay of 105 days in filing the appeal. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, the learned counsel appearing for the first respondent and the learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the second to fourth respondents. In view of the sufficient cause made out in the affidavit filed in support of the application, the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. Accordingly, the application is allowed.

(2.) Issue notice of appeal. The learned counsel appearing for the first respondent takes notice. The learned Additional Government Advocate takes notice for the second to fourth respondents. By consent, the appeal was taken up for final disposal. The submissions were heard yesterday.

(3.) The challenge in this appeal is to the judgment and order dated 1st March 2017 passed by the learned Single Judge. In a writ petition filed by the present petitioner, what was challenged before the learned Single Judge was an order passed on 12th January 2009 by the Special Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru District in a Revision Petition filed under the provisions of subsection (3) of Section 136 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 (for short 'the said Act of 1964').