BABU MADIVALA Vs. KUDDU MADIVALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners have questioned the order of the Land Reforms Appellate Authority, Udupi (Dakshina Kannada), passed in L. R. A. No. 1270 of 1988, dated 2/3-1-1989, modifying the order of the Land Tribunal to grant occupancy right only in respect of respondent 1-Kuddu madivala.

(2.) THE brief facts are as follows: the respondent 1-Kuddu Madivala filed Form 7 on 30-12-1974, claiming occupancy in respect of 16 cents of land in Survey No. 82/5 of shivalli Village and also in respect of other extent of land, which is not the subject-matter in this revision. On filing of the Form 7, public notices were issued. The owners namely, Sulochana Bhat and Ramakrishna Acharya were notified. The Land Tribunal recorded the evidence of the applicant Shri Kuddu Madivala. After considering the relevant records the Land Tribunal, Udupi, by its order dated 19-8-1981 granted occupancy in favour of the family to the extent of 16 cents in Survey No. 82/5. It appears after the occupancy was granted, the petitioner-Babu madivala and others filed O. S. No. 90 of 1986 before the Civil Judge court, Udupi, for partition as the occupancy right was granted in favour of the 'family'. It is also alleged that the petitioners made efforts to include their names in the revenue records. Therefore, Kuddu Madivala filed the Writ Petition No. 382 of 1986, before this Court questioning the order of the Land Tribunal insofar as it relates to grant of the occupancy right in favour of the 'family'. On establishment of the Appellate Authority, the proceedings in W. P. No. 382 of 1986 was transferred to the appellate Authority and numbered as L. R. A. No. 1280 of 1988. The appellate Authority by its order dated 2/3-1-1989 modified the order of the Land Tribunal to the extent that the occupancy should be granted only in favour of the applicant Kuddu Madivala. The petitioners being aggrieved by the orders of the Appellate Authority ordering to grant occupancy right only in the name of Kuddu Madivala, approached this hon'ble Court in this L. R. R. P. No. 1861 of 1989, questioning the order of the Appellate Authority. This Court by an order dated 29-8-1996 dismissed the revision with the observation that "the petitioners have not filed any application as contemplated in law nor they have made any statement before the Tribunal regarding their interest in the property consequent to issue of public notice, they have absolutely no locus standi to question the order of the Appellate Authority in this revision under section 121-A of the Land Reforms Act".

(3.) ON the dismissal of L. R. R. P. No. 1861 of 1989 by this Court, the petitioners filed civil appeal before the Apex Court in number 2956 of 1997. The Apex Court allowed the civil appeal with the following observations: