NINGAIAH Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA, REVENUE DEPARTMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Doddaiah, son of Kempaiah, the elder brother of the petitioner, had filed a statement on 16.09.1976, giving details of the vacant land he was holding in excess of the ceiling limit prescribed under the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1976 (for short the Act), as provided under S.6 of the Act. The Competent Authority under the Act surveyed the land and Doddaiah was served with a draft statement on 20.08.1983, under S.8(1) of the Act, calling for objections within 30 days. Doddaiah filed statement of objections on 13.09.1983. However, the Competent Authority found that Doddaiah was holding excess land in Sy. Nos.235/2 & 235/3, measuring 1939.93 sq.mtrs. and 10218.67 sq.mtrs. respectively and an order to that effect was passed under S.8(4) of the Act, on 22.10.1984. The Competent Authority issued a Notification dated 12.03.1985, under S.10(1) of the Act, which was published in the Karnataka Gazette dated 25.04.1985, giving the particulars of the vacant land held by Doddaiah. The Competent Authority later issued a Notification dated 20.07.1985, which was published in the Karnataka Gazette dated 01.08.1985 stating that the said excess vacant land shall be deemed to have been acquired by the Government of Karnataka with effect from 01.08.1985. The Competent Authority informed the Deputy Commissioner, Mysore District on 14.08.1985, to take possession of the said land under S.10(5) of the Act. The Competent Authority issued a notice under S.10(5) of the Act, directing Doddaiah to handover possession of the land declared as 'excess land', to the Deputy Commissioner, Mysore or the Authorized Representative, within a period of 30 days. The Surveyor attached to the Office of the Competent Authority conducted survey and prepared a sketch of the said lands on 10.12.1985. The Revenue Inspector, Kasaba, prepared a mahazar dated 22.10.1986 and assumed possession of the said excess land. The Competent Authority, in exercise of power under S.11(7) of the Act, passed an award on 16.11.1990.

(2.) Petitioner, who is the younger brother of Doddaiah, claiming that there was an oral partition between himself

(3.) Smt. P.C. Vinitha, learned advocate for the petitioner contended that the possession of the subject property has remained with the petitioner and although the land vested in the Government of Karnataka in view of the action taken under S.10(3) of the Act, the actual possession having remained with the petitioner, in view of the Act having been Repealed, by the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999 (for short, the Repeal Act) on 22.03.1999, the petitioner is entitled to continue to hold and enjoy the property without any kind of hindrance from the respondents and sought for passing of appropriate orders.