A.VIJAYAKUMAR Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is aggrieved of the impugned orders passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru Urban District in PTCL proceedings bearing No.SC.ST (Appeal) 31/2021 dtd. 31/10/2022, at Annexure-A.

(2.) The facts leading to this writ petition are that the 5th respondent herein filed a petition under Sec. 5 of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 (for short hereinafter referred to as 'PTCL Act') seeking a declaration that the sale deeds dtd. 24/3/2008 executed by Sri Venkatesh in favour of the petitioner herein is null and void. It was contended in the petition that 2 acres 4 guntas of land in Sy. No. 114 of Ramagondanahalli village, Varthur Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluk (now Bengaluru East Taluk) was granted in favour of Poojiga. In violation of the conditions of grant the lands were sold by Sri Poojiga in favour of Sri Patel Govindappa on 24/10/1951. Sri Govindappa sold the same in favour of Sri R. Munishamappa under registered sale deed dtd. 22/3/1955 and Sri Munishamappa sold it to Sri P. Chinnaiah son of Papaiah under registered sale deed dtd. 3/2/1959. Sri P.Chinnaiah sold the property to Sri N. Ravikiran on 17/11/1980. Sri Poojiga filed an application under Sec. 5 of the PTCL Act, in the year 1980-81 and the case was registered in SC.ST.117/1980-81. The Assistant Commissioner allowed the application while declaring that the sale was in violation of the conditions of grant. The purchasers filed an appeal before the Deputy Commissioner and the Deputy Commissioner dismissed the appeal on 2/2/1998. Aggrieved, the purchasers filed W.P. No.18169/1998 and this Court dismissed the writ petition on 11/8/1999. The Writ Appeal in W.A.No. 6649/1999 was also dismissed by this Court on 23/10/2000. The lands were restored in favour of Sri Poojiga and the revenue records were also mutated in his name. However since Sri N. Ravikiran and N. Kumar sought to disturb the possession at the hands of the legal heirs of Sri Poojiga, Smt.Narasamma, one of the legal heirs filed O.S. No. 46/1992. The suit was decreed and the defendants therein were permanently injuncted from interference with the suit schedule property. The defendants filed R.A. No. 63/1998 and the appeal was also dismissed. The Regular Second Appeal No. 761/2001 was also dismissed on 13/6/2007. However in the meanwhile it appears that the 5th respondent herein purchased the lands in question from one Sri Venkatesh, under registered sale deed dtd. 24/3/2008. The sale deed appears to have been executed by a power of attorney holder Sri P. Srinivas, on behalf of Sri Venkatesh.

(3.) The Assistant Commissioner however dismissed the application on the ground that there are no records available to show the grant made in favour of Sri Poojiga. It was also held by the Assistant Commissioner that since the 5th respondent contended that neither he nor his family members, being the legal heirs of late Sri Poojiga executed the sale deed or transferred the property in favour of the petitioner herein, there was no 'transfer' as defined in the PTCL Act and therefore the application is not maintainable.