AVVAMMA Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On 25-7-2014, the following order was passed:

(2.) Regard being had to the fact that there being no dispute over the three ingredients essential for decision making, as observed by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Pedda Reddy v. State of Karnataka and Others, 1993 1 KarLJ 328 (DB), i.e., the grant having been made to a member of a Scheduled Tribe laced with a condition of non-alienation and that transfer of the property in violation of the said condition or without permission of the State, there is no more doubt in my mind that by lawyer's ingenuity without disclosing the effect of Section 4 of the Act the petitioner's vendor-in-title obtained a decree of the Civil Court to have perfected title to the granted land by way of adverse possession after the Act came into force which is covered by the provisions of Section 4 of the Act. In the result, this petition devoid of merit, is rejected with cost quantified at Rs. 3,000/- payable to the third respondent.