S RUDRAPPA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is knocking at the doors of Writ Court for assailing the Land Tribunal order dtd. 16/3/2013 at Annexure-P whereby, in respect of the Petition land, occupancy has been granted in favour of the 3rd Respondent late Sri.Ghouse Mohiuddin. Learned counsel for the Petitioner argues that his client having obtained a specific performance decree in O.S.No.506/1996, has got the sale deed executed at the hands of the court itself; that being the position, his application for impleadment to the tenancy proceedings could not have been rejected by the Tribunal, that too in the final order itself. He also notifies to the court of the declaratory suit filed by the widow of original tenant Mr.Ghouse Mohiuddin in O.S.No.14/1998 inter alia against his client and brothers of her husband, which was disposed off without granting any relief because of pendency of application in Form 7.

(2.) After service of notice, the State and the Land Tribunal are represented by the learned HCGP. The L.Rs of original tenant Mr.Ghouse Mohiuddin are represented by their learned Advocate Sri.P.M.Siddamallappa who has filed Statement of Objections. Respondent Nos.5 & 6 who have also bought the property after the Land Tribunal had made the impugned order, are represented by learned counsel Mr.Jayanth along with Sr. Advocate Mr.M.S.Rajendra Prasad. All they oppose the Petition making submission in justifications of the impugned order and the reasons on which it has been structured.

(3.) Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the Petition Papers along with LCR made available by the learned HCGP, this Court is inclined to grant a limited indulgence in the matter inasmuch as: