UMESH UMESHAIAH Vs. NARASIMHAIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THAT the appellant is an unauthorised holder is not in doubt. Therefore, any alienation made in his favour by a holder of a service inam entitled to re-grant under the Karnataka Village Offices Abolition Act being void by operation of law on account of retrospective amendment made to Scctions4, 5 and 7 of the said Act, the very foundation of the claim of the appellant for lawful possession is knocked out in view of the Division Bench ruling in the case of Hanumaiah v State of Kamataka, ILR 1987(1) Karnataka 550.

(2.) THEREFORE, the lower appellate Court was correct in rejecting the appeal of theappellant having regard to the law declared by this Court in Hanumaiah's case (supra). This Court cannot intervene between legislative intent and the social welfare measure that was envisaged under the Karnataka Village Offices Abolition Act and protect unlawful possession of persons by entertaining suits for injunctions and granting the same. There is no merit in this appeal. THEREFORE, it is rejected.