RAMAPPAHANUMAPPA HUGAR Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER, questioning the legality and validity of the order dated 5th August 1989 on the file of the Land Reforms Appellate Authority, Bagalkot in No. LRA.626/87, setting aside the order passed by Land Tribunal, Badami, dated 26th August 1987 in proceedings No.KLR/LT/SR/232, has presented the instant revision petition.

(2.) THE grievance of the petitioner in the instant revision petition is that, the petitioner claiming to be tenant in respect of land bearing Sy.No.103/2 measuring o2 acres 18 guntas, situate at Narasapura Village, Badami Taluk, had filed Form No.7 for registration of occupancy rights. THE said application had come up for consideration before the Land Tribunal, Badami on 2nd December 1978 and the claim of petitioner was rejected. Being aggrieved by the said order passed by Land Tribunal, Badami dated 2nd December 1978, petitioner herein filed Writ Petition No.18757/1980 and the said writ petition was allowed by this Court and the matter was remitted back to Land Tribunal, Badami to conduct enquiry in strict compliance of Rule 17 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Rules. After remand, the Land Tribunal took up the matter for consideration on 26th August 1987. After considering the oral and documentary evidence, solely relying upon the alleged 34 revenue receipts produced by the tenant ? petitioner herein for having paid the revenue tax from 4th June 1952 to 24th April 1977, and also taking into consideration the entries found in the RTC extract for the years from 1969-70 to 1970-71 and registered the occupancy rights in his favour. Being aggrieved by the said order passed by Land Tribunal, Badami dated 26th August 1987, the third respondent herein filed the appeal on the file of the Land Reforms Appellate Authority, Bagalkot (hereinafter called the ?Appellate Authority?) in Appeal No.LRA.626/87. THE Appellate Authority after critical evaluation of the oral and documentary evidence, has given a specific finding at paragraphs 12 and 13 of its order holding that, the entries found in the RTC extract are not in accordance with law nor the petitioner herein has produced any authenticated document to establish as to how his name has been entered in the RTC extract, except making oral statement that, as per the vardi of Rangappa, his name has been entered in the revenue records. THE Appellate Authority, placing reliance on Exts.P1 to P3, the revenue receipts produced by third respondent to show that, he is the person who paid the revenue to the concerned Department in respect of the land in question, has given a specific finding holding that, the petitioner was not a tenant of the land in question and that, the said land did not also vest in Government as on 1st March 1974 for the reason that, the petitioner has failed to establish by producing any documents that, he is cultivating the said land as tenant as on 1st March 1974 and three years prior to that date, i.e. 1970-71 to 1973-74 nor has he established that, he is a tenant as per Section 4 of the Land Reforms Act and he is entitled for filing application for registration of occupancy rights under Section 44(1) of the Land Reforms Act as tenant. Being aggrieved by the said order dated 5th August 1989 passed by Appellate Authority, petitioner herein felt necessitated to present the instant revision petition.