STATE OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE-560001 REP. BY ITS SECRETARY Vs. SRI B. SRINIVASAIAH, S/O BYRAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE State Government is calling in question the order dated 21.08.2010 passed by the Special Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore District, thereby dropping the suo motu proceedings initiated by him under Section 136(3) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 (for short 'the Act').

(2.) THE Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue, Government of Karnataka, Bangalore addressed a letter dated 13.10.2006 to the Deputy Commissioner requesting to take necessary action with regard to the entries effected in the revenue records in the names of some private individuals, of the property allegedly belonging to the Government comprised in Sy.No. 21 of Hosahalli Village, Jala Hobli, Bangalore North (Additional) Taluk so as to take steps to correct the revenue entries.

(3.) THE Deputy Commissioner, has examined the entire materials and has recorded a finding that a registered sale deed dated 29.11.1945 had been executed by one Sri. Sheik Amanulla in favour of Smt. Ramijabiyanima at an undisputed point of time on 29.11.1945 wherein it was recited that the land was purchased in auction by the said Sri. Sheik Amanulla and hence there was no room for doubting the said recitals which were probablised by the conduct of the parties. Subsequently, the purchaser, Smt. Ramijabiyanima had sold an extent of 1 acre in favour of Sri. Sheik Peeran Sab under a sale deed dated 03.12.1959. Further Sri. Sheik Peeran Sab had sold the land in favour of Sri. Pillappa on 28.12.1972 and subsequently. Sri. Pillappa executed a registered sale deed on 30.11.1976 in favour of Sri. Mohammed Haneef, who in turn sold the land in favour of Sri. K.N. Manjunath. Thereafter. Sri. K.N. Manjunath executed a registered sale deed in favour of Sri. B. Sreenivasaiah, the 1st respondent herein. By virtue of the above, the Deputy Commissioner has opined that there was no case made out for interference in exercise of the revisional powers under Section 136(3) of the Act, to set aside those entries.