SHANKARAWWA Vs. DEVENDRAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Assistant Commissioner has in appeal set aside the mutation attested on the basis of a decree passed in O.S. No. 119 of 1984, on the ground that the procedure prescribed for attesting the mutation was not followed by the Tahsildar.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner has made a two-fold submission against the aforesaid order passed by the Appellate Authority. In the first place he submits that since the mutation had been attested on the basis of a decree passed by the Civil Court, the procedure prescribed by Sections 128 and 129 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act was inapplicable. Secondly he argues that the Appellate Authority ought to have remanded the matter back to the Tahsildar for a fresh order in accordance with law rather than simply setting aside the same without any further directions.

(3.) In so far as the first limb of the petitioner's argument isconcerned, the provisions of Section 129 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 do not make any exception insofar as mutations attested on the basis of the Court decrees are concerned. As a matter of fact, Section 128 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act does not exhaustively enumerate different modes of acquisition of title by the persons claiming a mutation entry in their favour. The said provision reads thus: Acquisitions of rights to be reported,