V NAGARAJ Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners, assailing the correctness of the order dated 23. 2. 1979 passed by the 2nd respondent - Land Tribunal in case no. LRF (THA) 113/1975-76 in respect of the land measuring 03 acres 20 guntas in Survey No. 163 of Yalachaguppe Village, Tavarekere Hobli, bangalore South Taluk vide Annexure-C and consequently to hold that the alienation made in favour of the Respondents-9 to 11 by respondents-4 to 8 are inconsequential, have presented this writ petition.

(2.) PETITIONERS are claiming that they are lineal descendents of the family of Late Shri. Rangaiah. The father of the second petitioner and grandfather of the first petitioner purchased the agricultural land measuring 06 acres 10 guntas including 0. 09 guntas phut kharab in sy. No. 163 of Yalachaguppe Village, Tavarekere Hobli, Bangalore South taluk and during his lifetime he was in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the said land. Be that as it may. Shri Rangiah died on 20. 2. 1987 leaving behind the petitioners and other family members as his legal heirs. After the death of Shri. Rangaiah and Smt. Gowramma, petitioners and other members of the family continued to be in lawful possession and enjoyment of the said land to the extent of 06 acres 10 guntas inherited through the said Late Sri Rangaiah. Be that as it may. One Sri Galappa now represented by respondents-4 to 8 has filed an application in Form No. 7 in respect of 03 acres 20 guntas of land in Sy. No. 163 of Yalachaguppe village before the 2nd respondent in proceeding No. LRF:113:1975-76. The 2nd respondent-Land Tribunal after issuing notice to the parties and after hearing, has registered the occupancy rights in favour of late sri Galappa by its order dated 23. 2. 1979 in respect of land in question to the extent of 3 acres 20 guntas, without conducting proper enquiry and without notifying the deceased Sri Rangappa. In view of not issuing any notice and not affording opportunity to Sri Rangappa, and granting occupancy rights in favour of one Sri Galappa, now represented by respondents-4 to 8 and who have sold the property in favour of respondents-9 to 11, petitioners felt necessitated to present the instant writ petition seeking appropriate reliefs as stated supra.

(3.) I have heard learned Counsel appearing for petitioners and learned government Pleader appearing for respondents-1 and 2.