GANAPATHI DEVARU BHAT Vs. LAND TRIBUNAL SIRSI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, owner of lands bearing Sy.'Nos. 10 measuring 2 acres 10 guntas, 11 B/1 measuring 6 guntas, 19 measuring 10 guntas of Dasanagadde village, Sirsi Taluk, has prayed that the order dated 19-2-1977, passed by the Land Tribunal, Sirsi, in Case No. LRMSR 1078/1974, conferring occupancy right over these lands in favour of respondent No. 3, be quashed.

(2.) Respondent No. 3 filed form No. 7 claiming occupancy right over these lands contending that he had cultivated these lands as tenant of the petitioner since the year 1960-1961. The petitioner objected to the claim of respondent No. 3. Ext..-D, the certified copy of the impugned order, narrates the cases of respondent No. 3 and the petitioner. Respondent No. 3 made out that originally he had been given possession for cultivation of an area of 7 acres 15 guntas in lands bearing Sy. Nos. 10, 10-B/3 and 19 of Dasanagadde village, and out of the said area, he was cultivating an area of 3 acres 35 guntas as the archaic of Ganapathidevaru, the family deity of the petitioner, but in the year 1960 he had surrendered these lands to the petitioner and the petitioner inducted him as a tenant on the lands in dispute and since then he has been cultivating these lands as a tenant. The petitioner's case was that after respondent No. 3 surrendered the lands in the year 1960 and gave up working as an archak of the Ganapati deity in the year 1962, he has been cultivating personally all the lands that were in the possession of respondent No. 3 earlier to that, and that respondent No. 3 was never in possession and cultivation of these lands from the year 1962.

(3.) The undisputed facts as found narrated in the impugned order and not challenged in the writ petition are, that the petitioner and respondent No. 3 gave a joint wardi to the Village Accountant requesting him to enter them as the persons in possession and cultivation of the lands in question. The petitioner objected to the wardi later, and as such an RTS proceeding commenced and ultimately, the Dy. Commissioner held in favour of respondent No. 3 and the name of respondent No. 3 came to be entered in the record of rights. Respondent No. 3 filed a suit for injunction but it related to his right to worship Ganapathi deity. The petitioner filed an original suit praying for possession of the lands from respondent No. 3 on the ground that respondent No. 3 was not a tenant and also for the recovery of income derived by respondent No. 3 from these lands from the year 1970 to 1973. It is also seen from Ext.- D that the petitioner has admitted in his cross examination to the effect that he had, in the Civil Court, stated about his having given wardi for entering the name of respondent No. 3 and the proceedings that transpired thereupon ; that respondent No. 3 had paid levy paddy to the Government in respect of these lands, and that he had stated in the Civil Court and also before the Circle Inspector to the effect that the name of respondent No. 3 was to be entered in the record of rights as tenant.