J.V. GANGADHARACHAR AND ORS. Vs. THE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT OF LAND REFORMS/REVENUE AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.

(2.) The facts are that the land bearing survey No. 33/7 measuring 37 guntas of Jaraganahllli, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk was claimed to be subjected to tenancy by the father of respondents No. 4 to 6 and that the father of respondents No. 4 to 6 filed form No. 7 seeking occupancy rights under the provisions of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961.

(3.) The learned Counsel for the petitioner would contend that the Tribunal has proceeded to refer to the RTC extracts which are stated to contain the name of the father of respondents No. 4 to 6 one Munithimmaiah being in cultivation of the land in question and there was no material evidence placed before the Tribunal to indicate the relationship of the said Munithimmaiah with respondents No. 4 to 6. Therefore, mere indication of one Munithimmaiah being in cultivation of the land by itself did not establish the relationship of tenancy either between the father of the petitioner and the father of respondents 4 to 5 or between the petitioner and the father of respondents No. 4 to 6 or respondents themselves. The Tribunal having proceeded to grant occupancy rights merely on the basis that one Munithimmaiah @ Obaiah was cultivating the land, could not have conferred occupancy rights. There is no indication of relationship between the said Munithimmaiah and respondents Nos. 4 to 6.