K K BASAPPA Vs. LAND TRIBUNAL SOMWARPET

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners in the above writ petition have questioned the correctness of the order passed by the Land Tribunal, Somwarpet, on 20-10-1975 declar ng that respondent 2 was a tenant in occupation of the land bearing Sy No 491 mersuring 3 acres in Kibbetta village of Somwarpet and was therefore entitled to Le registered as its occupant.

(2.) The 1st petitioner was the owner of the land in question. He mortgaged it with possession in favour of a certain Manual Lobo in the year 1968 and the moitgagee got into possession of the same under the said transaction. Thererfter the mortgagee leased out the land in favour of respondent 2. Since the lease granted in his favour had not been duly terminated till 1-3-1974, he appled to the Land Tribunal, Somwarpet, to register him as the occupant of the land under S.45 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act. The Land Tribunal considered the statements made by the parties be fore it and the documents prcduced by them and came to the conclusion that the 2nd respondent was entitled to be registered as the occupant of the land in question. Hence this petition.

(3.) It is not disputed by the petitioners that Manual Lobo was put in possesion of the land as a mortgagee in possession. The 2nd respondent produced before the Tribunal certan documents executed by Manual Lobo shoving that he was cultivating the land as a tenant under Manual Lobo end was paying rent to him. The total-extent of the land bearing Sy No.49 as can be seen from the extract of the pahani produced by the 2nd respondent before the Tribunal is 9 acres 46 cents. The name of the 2nd respondent is shewn in the cultivator's column against 3 acres, out of the total evtent of 9 acres 46 cents, in the pahani extracts for the years 1971-72, 72-73 and 73-74. The 2nd respondent has also produced a notice of demand served on h'm by the Revenue Inspector, Somwarpet on 13-4-1973 calling rprn him to supply a certain quantity of paddy which he had grown. From the foregoing it becomes "evident that respondent 2 was in possession of on extent cf 3 acres of land in Sy. No.49 during the years 1971-72 to 73-74. His possession during these years can only be traced to the possession which he got as a lessee under Manuel Lobo, the mortgagee in possession.