DEVAKI Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners, being aggrieved by the impugned order dated 8. 8. 2002 passed by the Land Tribunal, Bantwal, in proceeding no. TNC: 8253: 74-75 vide Annexure-J, have presented this Writ Petition. Further, petitioners have sought to direct the Land Tribunal, Bantwal, to grant occupancy rights in favour of the petitioners in respect of Survey no. 473/1d measuring 0. 84 cents of Punacha Village, Bantwal Taluk.

(2.) ONE Sri Late Aithu Naika, husband of the first petitioner and father of petitioners-2 to 4 claiming that he is the tenant in respect of the land in question has filed Form No. 7 for registration of occupancy rights before the 2nd respondent-Land Tribunal, Bantwal. The Land Tribunal, Bantwal, by its order dated 9. 9. 1981 has registered the occupancy rights in his favour. Assailing the correctness of the order passed by the Land Tribunal, bantwal, respondents-3 and 4 herein have filed a Writ Petition before this Court in No. 31114/1981. This Court has allowed the said writ petition and set aside the order passed by the Land Tribunal, Bantwal and remitted the matter for reconsideration afresh. After the remand, the matter is taken up for consideration by the Land Tribunal, Bantwal and without conducting the proper enquiry as envisaged under the relevant provisions of the Act and Rules and without reference to the report submitted by the surveyor wherein he has specifically stated that Sy. No. 473/1d measuring 0. 84 acres is cultivated by petitioners and they are in possession of the same, has rejected the claim of the petitioners holding that as on 1. 3. 1974, they are not cultivating the said land inspite of giving evidence by the petitioners that tehy are cutivting the said land as tenants. The said reasoning given by the Land Tribunal, Bantwal, is contrary to the relevnt materials available on file and the same is liable to be set aside. Having regard to these backgrounds, petitioners herein felt necessitated to present this writ petition seeking appropriate relief as stated supra.

(3.) I have heard learned Counsel appearing for petitioners, learned government Pleader appering for respondents-1 and 2 and learned Counsel appearing for 4th respondent.