S. CHANDRASHEKAR Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THOUGH the matter is listed for preliminary hearing, by consent of both the parties, the appeals are heard on merits. Respondent No. 4 has filed a writ petition in W.P. No. 33267/2011 challenging the legality and correctness of the initiation of the acquisition proceedings by respondents 2 and 3 in respect of Sy. No. 65 measuring 2 acres 13 guntas, Sy. No. 70 measuring 5 acres 21 guntas, Sy. No. 72 measuring 1 acre, Sy. No. 65 measuring 3 acres situated at Bheemanakuppe Village, and Sy. No. 13 measuring 20 guntas situated in Challaghatta village, Kengeri Hobli. In the said writ petition, the appellant herein filed an application to come on record contending that he is the owner of Sy. No. 70 of Bheemanakuppe village and that any order, may be passed, would affect his rights. The learned Single Judge has rejected the application filed by the appellant to come on record as additional respondent on the ground that the dispute between the appellant and the 4th respondent has to be adjudicated in a Civil case and that he is not a necessary or proper party to the writ petition. Accordingly, the LA. came to be rejected. Challenging the legality and correctness of the same, the present appeal is filed.

(2.) HAVING heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties, we notice that the dispute is regarding identity of the property in respect of Sy. No. 70 of Bheemanakuppe village. The appellant claims that he is the owner of Sy. No. 70. According to the 4th respondent, he is the owner of Sy. No. 70 and what the appellant's father had purchased is only Sy. No. 62 and based on the sale deed pertaining to Sy. No. 62, a claim is made by him and that the matter is pending consideration before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal regarding change of Revenue entries, between the appellant and 4th respondent.