GANAPATHI S O HANUMANTH NAIK Vs. LAND TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS have sought for issuance of a writ of certiorari to quash the order dated 20. 6. 2003 - Annexure A passed by the Land Tribunal, Kumta in respect of the scheduled lands and also to issue a writ of mandamus to register the petitioners as occupants of the petition schedule lands under S. 48a of the Land Reforms Act to an extent of 1/3rd share in all the petition schedule properties and to reject the application of 4th respondent Bhavani W/o Gangadhar Naik claiming exclusive right over Sy. No. 506/1 C of Kumta Village.

(2.) ORIGINALLY one Venku Narayana Naik the grand father of the petitioners and the contesting respondents was in actual possession of the schedule lands as a tenant from 1931-32 and in this regard, RTC is produced at Annexure B. He had four sons by name Hanumantha, Masti, Devappa and Lakshman. Petitioners 1 to 3 are the sons of Hanumanth and petitioners 4 to 7 are the children of Laxman Venku Naik. Respondents 2 to 6 are the legal representatives of Smt. Parameswari Devappa Naik. One Parameshwari Masti Naik viz. , w/o Masti another son of Venku Narayana Naik had filed Form 7 for occupancy rights in respect of the scheduled lands and she died issueless. All the four brothers i. e. , sons of late Venku Narayana Naik remained undivided till their death. After their death, the family of Venku Narayan Naik remained undivided till date. As on 1. 3. 1974 and prior thereto the schedule lands were in actual possession and cultivation of the Joint Hindu family There was no partition by metes and bounds nor any one of the family member was in separate and exclusive possession of his property. Since the petitioners were in actual possession and enjoyment of the schedule properties as tenants along with the other family members including the contesting respondents, they had filed an application under S. 45 of the Land Reforms Act seeking occupancy rights of all the petition schedule properties along with other members of the family. Simultaneously, even the contesting respondents also filed application seeking grant of occupancy rights exclusively to them. One Parameshwari Devappa Naik filed Form 7 with respect to Sy. No. 506/1a3, 483/23a1, 483/ 2c and 483/3 in a single application and the second application in Form 7 was filed in respect of the property in Heravatta Village regarding Sy. Nos. 17/1/b, 17/2, 17/3, 18, 19 and 20. The 4th respondent Bhavani Gangadhar Naik also filed separate Form 7 for occupancy rights in respect of Sy. No. 506/1c of Kumta Village. By order dated 26. 2. 1994, the Land Tribunal after having registered all the applications of the petitioners as well as the contesting respondents, passed an order granting occupancy rights to the extent of 1/3rd share each. According to the petitioners, Parameshwarai Devappa Naik and Bhavani Gangadhar Naik made a false and frivolous claim by filing W. P. 6866/1994 and 8564/1994 claiming exclusive rights in respect of certain lands. However, by a common order, both the writ petitions were dismissed on 9. 9. 1998. The same was challenged in two writ appeals and the order-dated 9. 9. 1998 was set aside and by order-dated 26. 2. 2002, the matter was remanded back to the Land Tribunal. Pursuant to the same, the Land Tribunal has passed the impugned order at annexure A. Hence, this petition on various grounds.

(3.) HEARD the counsel representing the parties as well as the Government Pleader.