S PITCHUMUTHU Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WRIT petitioner claims to be a financier who had lent some money in favour of a person who was a purchaser of land that had been originally granted in favour of a scheduled caste person and subject to certain conditions. The land in question was subject-matter of proceedings before the Authorities under the provisions of the Karnataka Scheduled castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands)Act, 1978, at the instance of the grantee or legal heir of the grantee for setting aside the transfer of the land for resumption of the same to the state and restoration to the applicant. It appears pursuant to that application an order has been passed by the Assistant Commissioner in terms of the order dated 15-11- 2003 (copy at Annexure-E ).

(2.) IT is also the case of the petitioner that the petitioner had instituted a civil suit for recovery of the amount that he had lent in favour of the purchaser-respondent 4 in this writ petition in O. S. No. 12 of 1993 on the file of the Civil Judge (Senior Division) at Hunsur. It is also the further version of the petitioner that the said suit was decreed and the petitioner was in the process of executing the decree. It is at this stage that the petitioner had realised that the land against which the proceedings were sought to be taken for execution of the decree was no more available with the judgment-debtor that the land had been resumed in favour of the State and restored to the applicant claiming under the grantee.

(3.) IT is also the further case of the petitioner that the petitioner having come to know the said fact, gave a representation/application to the Assistant Commissioner inter alia pointing out that the proceedings before the Assistant Commissioner was as a result of practice of fraud or deception on the part of the applicant claiming under the grantee; that the order is required to be set aside etc. , and the petitioner should be permitted to realise the fruits of his decree.