SHIVANNA Vs. PUTTABASAVAIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER, represented by his legal representatives being aggrieved by the order dated 28th february, 1990 on the file of the District Land Reforms Appellate Authority, Tumkur in L. R. A. No. 40 of 1999, reversing the order passed by Land Tribunal, Tiptur, dated 18th February, 1987 in proceedings No. LRF. 18/76-77, has presented the instant revision petition.

(2.) THE petitioner claiming to be a tenant had filed the application for registration of occupancy rights in respect of Sy. No. 41 measuring 5 acres 20 guntas situate at Jakkanahalli Village, kibbanahalli Hobli, Tiptur Taluk. The said application filed by petitioner had come up for consideration before the Land Tribunal, Tiptur-third respondent herein on 5th September, 1977. The application filed by petitioner was rejected. Against the said order passed by Land Tribunal, tiptur, petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 12125 of 1977 before this Court. The writ petition filed by petitioner was allowed by this Court and the order passed by Land Tribunal, Tiptur, dated 5th september, 1977 was set aside and the matter was remanded back to the Land Tribunal for fresh consideration. After remand, the Land Tribunal took up the matter on 18th December, 1987 and registered occupancy rights in favour of petitioner on the ground that, his name is found in the rtc at column 12 (2) for the agricultural year 1967-68. Being aggrieved by the said order passed by Land Tribunal, Tiptur, dated 18th December, 1987, the first respondent herein, represented by his legal representatives, has filed the appeal on the file of the Additional Land Reforms appellate Authority and numbered as L. R. A. No. 53 of 1988 and subsequently, it has been transferred to the District Land Reforms Appellate Authority (hereinafter called the "appellate authority"), Tumkur District, Tumkur and renumbered as L. R. A. No. 40 of 1999. Along with the appeal, the appellant has filed the application praying leave of the Appellate Authority to prosecute the appeal as envisaged under Rule 10 of the Karnataka Land Reforms (Appellate authority) Rules, 1986. The said application seeking leave to prosecute the appeal had come up for consideration before the Appellate Authority on 25th August, 1988. After hearing both sides, the application has been allowed and that order has become final. The Appellate Authority after careful perusal of the entire original records available on file and after critical evaluation of the oral and documentary evidence, adduced by both parties, and with reference to Exhibits A. 1 to a. 14, produced by deceased first respondent, now represented by his legal representatives, and exhibits C. 1 to C. 8 produced by deceased petitioner, now represented by his legal representatives, by assigning cogent reasons with reference to credible documentary evidence has set aside the order passed by Land Tribunal, Tiptur, dated 18th December, 1987 and allowed the appeal filed by the deceased first respondent by its order dated 28th February, 1990 in L. R. A. No. 40 of 1999. Being aggrieved by the said order passed by Appellate Authority, referred above, reversing the order of the Land Tribunal, Tiptur, petitioner herein felt necessitated to present the instant revision petition.

(3.) THE principal submission canvassed by learned Counsel appearing for petitioner, now represented by his legal representatives, is that, the appeal filed by deceased first respondent is not maintainable on the file of the Appellate Authority against the order passed by Land tribunal, dated 18th December, 1987, on the ground that, the second respondent has also filed an appeal in L. R. A. No. 3 of 1988 against the same order and the said appeal filed by second respondent has been dismissed by the Appellate Authority by its order dated 15th July, 1988 and second respondent is none other than the vendor of the first respondent and that, the said order has become final. Deceased first respondent claiming to be predecessor of the land in question was not a party to the proceedings before the Land Tribunal and therefore, assailed the correctness of the order passed by the Land Tribunal and the appeal has been entertained contrary to the relevant provisions of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 (hereinafter called the 'act') and Karnataka Land Reforms Rules, 1974 (hereinafter called the 'rules' ). He submitted that, the Appellate Authority has also failed to appreciate that, there is inordinate delay in preferring the appeal and the same has not been considered nor any finding is given to that effect. Instead, the Appellate Authority has proceeded to pass the impugned order without giving any finding on the question of delay and allowed the appeal filed by first respondent by reversing the order passed by Land Tribunal. Therefore, the impugned order passed by the Appellate authority is liable to be aside.