RAJALAKSHMI Vs. CHAIRMAN,LAND TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners are knocking at the doors of Writ Court seeking quashment of order dtd. 13/12/2019 entered by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal whereby the case of the 2nd respondent in Appeal No.774/2018 having been favoured, the Land Tribunal's order dtd. 14/3/2018 granting petitioners claim in Form-7A filed u/s.77A of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 seeking grant of subject land, has been set at naught.

(2.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners draws attention of the Court to four entries in the Revenue Records for the year 1970-71 to 1973-74, the subsequent entries being irrelevant, the cut-off date itself being 1/3/1974. These entries came to be made on the basis of Varsa ie., inheritance, and that they enjoy presumptive value u/s.133 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964. That being the position, his clients are continuing as tenants of the subject land since much before 1/3/1974 and therefore the impugned orders are to be voided, argues the counsel for the petitioner. Learned AGA appearing for the official respondents and the learned private counsel appearing for the private respondents vehemently oppose the petition making submission in justification of the impugned order and the reasons on which it is structured. They contend that stray entries baselessly made cannot enjoy presumptive value. There is absolutely no evidence supportive of the case of petitioners. So contending they seek dismissal of the petition.

(3.) Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the petition papers, this Court declines indulgence in the matter broadly agreeing with the submission made on behalf of the respondents. This court hastens to adds that a Writ Court exercising a limited supervisory jurisdiction constitutionally vested under Article 227 cannot upset the findings of fact recorded by a statutory expert body, especially when there is no demonstrable error apparent on the face of the record vide SADHANA LODH vs. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD, (2003) 3 SCC 524. It cannot be overlooked that the Tribunal is constituted under the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal Act, 1976 and it comprises of a District Judge of Selection Grade and a senior I.A.S. Officer of the State Government. The Tribunal after turning the pages of original LCR has recorded a finding that the petitioners had not filed the requisite application in Form-7A at all. Even here also, no material is produced to dislodge the said finding.