VENKANNA Vs. FAKIRAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The dispute involved in this writ petition relates to a land bearing Sy. No. 51 (old) 63 (new) situated in Hosahajli village, Koppal Taluk. The said land originally belonged to one Hanumanthappa son of Amateppa Mulimani. The petitioner purchased it in the year 1965. Tt had been leased in favour of the first respondent and he was in possession of it. The petitioner claiming to be the purchaser of the land dispossessed the first respondent in 1967. The first respondent filed an application before the Land Tribunal, Koppal in 1968 stating that he had been dispossessed by the petitioner illegally and praying that the Tribunal might direct redelivery of the land to him. The said application was made under S. 41 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') as it stood then. The Land Tribunal rejected his application by its order dated 30-3-1972. The appeal filed by the first respondent against that order before the District Judge, Raichur, was dismissed on 20-9-1972. Against the order of the District Judge, the first respondent preferred a revision petition before this Court in C.R.P. 265 of 1973. The said revision petition was allowed by this Court on 4th January, 1974. By that order, the High Coturt declared that the 1st respondent was a tenant of the land when he was forcibly dispossessed and directed the petitioner to put the first respondent in possession of it. Against that order, the petitioner filed a Special Leave Petition under Art. 136 of the Constitution before the Supreme Court in S.L.P. (Civil) No. 755 of 1974. That petition was allowed to be withdrawn and dismissed by the Supreme Court on 18-12-1974. Thereafter, on 5-3-1975 the first respondent applied to the Deputy Commissioner, Raichur, to execute the order passed by this Court and to put him in possession of the land in question. The Deputy Commissinoer forwarded the application to the Tahsildar, Koppal, for necessary action. The Tahsildar registered the said application and proceeded to take action. On 5-3-1975 the first respondent made an application directly to the Tahsildar under S. 116(2) of the Act to execute the order passed by the High Court and to put him in. possession of the property.

(2.) Sec.116(2) of the Act reads as follows : "An order of the Tribunal or other authority awarding possession or restoring the possession or use of any land shall be executed in the same manner as an order passed by a Revenue Officer under the Mysore Land Revenue Act, 1964."

(3.) In this writ petition the petitioner has questioned the order of the Deputy Commissioner forwarding the application to the Tahsildar and the action taken by the Tahsildar on the application made by the first respondent on 5-3-1975.