LAWS(KAR)-1993-9-29

MALLANGOUDA SHANKARAGOUDA DESAI Vs. MURIGEPPA CHANNAVEERAPPA MODI

Decided On September 03, 1993
MALLANGOUDA SHANKARAGOUDA DESAI Appellant
V/S
MURIGEPPA CHANNAVEERAPPA MODI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) the first respondent made an application in terms of Section 142 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act') read with Section 84-a of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Bombay Act'). The tahsildar concerned validated the transaction between one shankarappagouda basalingappagouda desai and subhachandra mahantappa modi after levying a penalty of Rs. 100/-. This order is called in question in this proceeding.

(2.) it is contended that under Section 63 of the Bombay Act sale and transfer of an agricultural land to a non-agriculturist is prohibited. The first respondent being a doctor by profession was not an agriculturist and therefore the registered gift deed dated 15-3-1952 is invalid. Any transaction entered into in contravention of the said Provisions could be validated by resort to Section 84-a of the Bombay Act. It is stated that application for validation of the transaction in this case had been filed in the year 1988, by which time, on the coming into force of the Act, the Bombay Act stood repealed and therefore power under Section 84-a of the Bombay Act was no more available for the authority with effect from 2-10-1965 and hence the order impugned is without jurisdiction. It was further pointed out that first respondent could not rely upon the Provisions of Section 142 of the act as there was no right, privilege or obligation or liability acquired, accrued or incurred under the Bombay Act. It was also contended that no notice was served upon the petitioner in this behalf.

(3.) Section 142 of the act provides for repeal and savings of certain enactments and Bombay Act is one of the enactments referred to thereof. As on 1-11-1956 when states reorganisation took place Section 84-a of the Bombay Act in so far as it relevant to the purpose of the present case stood in effect thus, that is to say, it validated the transfers that had been effected, in contravention of Section 63 or 64, after coming into force of the parent act and before 15th june, 1955, on payment of penalty at the rate of 5 per cent of the consideration amount or Rs. 100 whichever is less. And on payment of such penalty the mamlatdar would issue a certificate to the effect transfer is not invalid.