B THIMMAMMA Vs. STATE OF KAKNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner applied for occupancy rights in Form No. 7 which is rejected by a cryptic order. Petitioner preferred an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal. THE Appellate Tribunal in a considered order has held that there is no document to prove that the petitioner was in possession on the appointed date i.e., 1-3-1974 and in these circumstances dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved by the dismissal of the appeal, the petitioner-tenant has preferred this revision petition.

(2.) THIS Court has consistently taken the view that there can be no reappraisal of evidence in a revision petition. The learned Counsel drew my attention to the judgment of this Court in the case of Racha Naika v State of Karnataka and Others, wherein this Court has held: