ANJANAMMA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Sri R. Omkumar, the learned Additional Government Advocate is directed to take notice for the respondent Nos. 1 to 4. Notice to the respondent Nos. 5 to 8 is dispensed with. The petitioner has called into question the Assistant Commissioner's order, dated 28.10.2008 (Annexure-J) and the Deputy Commissioner's order, dated 16.9.2011 (An-nexure-K).

(2.) The detailed advertance to the facts of the case may not be necessary. The petitioner claims that her husband late Sri Anjanappa had 2 wives herself and Kempamma. Alleging that the joint family property was wrongly mutated in favour of the respondent Nos. 5, 6, 7 and 8, they filed the appeal before the Assistant Commissioner. The Assistant Commissioner dismissed the appeal on the ground that the coparcenary rights of the parties cannot be determined by the revenue authorities. Aggrieved by the dismissal of their appeal, the petitioner and Kempamma filed the revision petition before the Deputy Commissioner. The Deputy Commissioner dismissed the revision petition holding that the revenue authorities are not competent to adjudicate the relationship, succession and legal heirship of the parties, etc.

(3.) Sri P. Narayanappa, the Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that both the revenue authorities have misread a vital aspect of the matter. He submits that there is no dispute of coparcenary right between the petitioner and the contesting respondents. He further submits that the contesting respondents are not related to the petitioner.