KAGGODAPPA Vs. DIVL COMMR BANGALORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On Preliminary Hearing This petition has arisen out of an order dated 21-9-1979 (No. ILR. RP. 1/79-80) (Ex-C) of the Divisional Commissioner Bangalore. By that order the Divisional Commr. declined to restore a revision petition (No.IRP 78-79) dismissed by him for default on 16-2-79. That was a revision filed by the petitioner under S. 66 of the Karnataka Irrigation, Act, 1965 (the Act) against the order of the Assistant Executive Engineer, No.1 Sub-Division, Tumkur (respondent-1 herein) directing him not to obstruct the 3rd respondent (herein) from taking water to his (3rd respondent's) land bearing Sy.No.115 of Urdagere village, Tumkur Taluk.

(2.) Though this petition had been listed for hearing re. Rule, the learned Counsel appearing for both the parties agreed to argue the matter on merits, and were accordingly heard.

(3.) The Divisional Commissioner dismissed the restoration application mainly on the ground that it was belated, in that, it had been preferred beyond the period of 30 days, the period prescribed to prefer such application. Apart from contending that the Divisional Commissioner should not have dismissed the restoration application as barred by time, the learned Counsel for the petitioner also argued that the Divisional Commissioner had committed an error in law in dismissing the revision for default in appearance of the party.