MAHADEVAMMA Vs. DEENA SEVA ASHARMA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has assailed order dated 1-8-2014 passed in proceeding No. RRT(S) CR:188/2011-12 on the file of respondent 4-Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore Urban District, Bangalore (Annexure-F to the writ petition). The relevant facts of the case are that petitioner's mother Smt. Botamma alias Sanna Yellamma and Sri Sanna Yellappa were regranted certain lands under the provisions of Karnataka Village Offices Abolition Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for the sake of brevity) along with Sanna Yellappa. The lands were regranted to them as said lands were Thoti Inam Service Lands. The regrant was made in respect of lands bearing Sy. Nos. 1,6, 29, 33 and 53 of Volagerehalli Village and Sy. No. 8 of Sonnenahalli Village. In this writ petition the controversy is with regard to Sy. No. 53 measuring 1 acre 1 gunta at Volagerahalli Village (hereinafter referred to as 'land in question' for the sake of convenience). The regrant order was passed in the year 1970. Subsequently, the regrantees alienated the land in question i.e., Sy. No. 53 measuring 1 acre 1 gunta in favour of respondent 1 under a registered sale deed dated 17-4-1972. Thereafter, respondent 1 sold the said extent of land to two persons, namely, Errol Mathias and Lynette Mathias on 28-6-1972 by registered sale deed. It is also on record that on 20-5-1983, there was a registered deed of cancellation executed by the latter two persons in favour of respondent 1. Thereafter, respondent 1 sought for re-entry of their name in the revenue records, which was permitted by the Revenue Authorities.

(2.) When the matter stood thus, petitioner herein approached the jurisdictional Tahsildar, with regard to annulling alienation made by them in respect of Sy. Nos. 1, 6, 29, 33 as well as 53 of Valagerahalli Village and Sy. No. 8 of Sonnenahalli Village. Significantly, respondent 1 herein who was the alienee of Sy. No. 53, the land in question, was not arrayed as a respondent in that proceeding. By order dated 18-2-1992, the Tahsildar held that the application filed by the petitioners were allowed. Being aggrieved by that order some of the respondents before the Tahsildar filed MA No. 25 of 1993 before the learned District Judge at Bangalore. By judgment dated 31-10-2003, the appeal was dismissed. That judgment was assailed in W.P. No. 3219 of 2005 before this Court and on 12-7-2005 the said writ petition was also dismissed. As against that order SLP No. 23562 of 2005 was filed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 11-3-2010. The Hon'ble Supreme Court also dismissed the said SLP.

(3.) Thereafter, the petitioner herein sought for entry of her name in the revenue records and by the order dated 17-12-2011 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore Urban District, the request made by the petitioner was granted in respect of the land in question also. That order was challenged by respondent 1 in W.P. No. 1062 of 2012 before this Court. By order dated 2-7-2012 this Court quashed order dated 17-12-2011 and remanded the matter to respondent 4-Deputy Commissioner for reconsideration and kept open all contentions on both sides. Pursuant to order dated 2-7-2012, respondent 4-Deputy Commissioner has passed the impugned order on 1-8-2014. By that order the Deputy Commissioner has stated that the name of respondent 1 herein must be entered in respect of the land in question. That order is assailed by the petitioner herein in this writ petition.