BHARAMAVVA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners assailing the legality and validity of the impugned order dated 27-4-1977 passed by the 2nd respondent-Land Tribunal (Annexure-C) insofar as grant of occupancy rights in respect of the land in Sy. No. 153/1-A of Billahalli Village in favour of Sri Basappa Angadi, father of the respondents 3 and 4 have filed this writ petition.

(2.) THE case of the petitioners is that they are the owners of land bearing R. S. No. 153/1-A measuring an extent of 1 acre 28 guntas including 2 guntas of Kharab land situated at Billahalli village, Kup-pavara Hobli, Ranebennur Taluk. The father of respondents 3 arid 4, one Sri basappa Angadi has filed Form 7 for grant of occupancy rights in respect of the land in question, which had come up for consideration before the Land Tribunal on 27-4-1977. The Land tribunal, after hearing, recording the evidence of late Basappa Angadi and considering the material available on record granted the occupancy rights in favour one Basappa Angadi. Further, the case of the petitioners is that, without issuing any notice to the petitioners, the Land tribunal has proceeded ex parte and passed the orders unilaterally. No opportunity as such, was given to the petitioners or conducted any enquiry as provided under the relevant provisions of the Land Reforms Rules, 1974. Further, they have stated that there is a delay in filing this writ petition because they came to know about the order of the Tribunal only when respondents 3 and 4 made attempts during November 2002 and in the 1st week of December 2002. Immediately, they obtained the certified copies of necessary papers and engaged the services of learned counsel and filed this petition. The delay in filing the writ petition is bona fide and not intentional one. Assailing the correctness of the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent-Land Tribunal, the petitioners have filed this writ petition.

(3.) HEARD the learned Counsel for the petitioners at a considerable length of time. Perused the entire material on record, gone through the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent carefully and re-evaluated the entire documents furnished by the writ petitioners.