TARA A PRABHU Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER Smt. Tara A. Prabhu is challenging the order of the Land tribunal, Mangalore Taluka, Mangalore, dated 28-6-2003 in this petition.

(2.) FACTS in brief are as follows.-Petitioner is the owner of land Sy. No. 258 of Kasba Bazar Village, mangalore measuring 0. 24 acres. The said land was acquired by a gift deed. The land is in the heart of Mangalore City opposite to mahammaya temple. Land consists of several residential houses including five houses occupied by respondents 3 to 7 in the matter. Rent bonds were executed by the tenants in terms of Annexures-A to E.

(3.) THERE is no agrarian relationship of the landlord and the tenants between the parties and therefore the provisions of the Karnataka Land reforms Act (for short, "the Act") is not applicable. Contesting respondents however filed application in Form 7 claiming occupancy rights. Same was opposed by the predecessors of the petitioner. The tribunal rejected the claim in terms of the order dated 12-9-1977. Thereafter, they have filed an application in Form 2-A claiming that they are agricultural labourers in occupation of the respective residential houses. Petitioner states that respondent 5 styling himself as a retired Supervisor of KEB and the respondent 7 styling himself as clerk of Diamond Garage filed applications. The Land Tribunal by an order dated 6-5-1986 registered the respondents as owners. Writ petition was filed by the petitioner in W. P. No. 28300 of 1992. This Court set aside the order of the Land Tribunal and remanded the matter for re-decision. After remand, detailed affidavits were filed in lieu of oral evidence in all the five cases. Petitioner also produces a letter from ksrtc with regard to respondent 3 having worked as Driver. The Land tribunal in terms of the order dated 28-6-2003 registered the respondents 3 to 7 as owners of the residential houses. Annexure-S is the order. This order is challenged by the petitioner on the ground that in terms of the Act respondents could not be termed as 'agricultural labourers' and that, even otherwise, since the lands are situated in mangalore City, they could not have been granted the residential houses in terms of the Act.