GADIGEYYA SIDDALINGAYYA HIREMATH Vs. VEERAYYA SAVALAGEYYA SAVALAGJMATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision under Section 121 -A of the Kamataka Land Reforms Act 1961 (for short 'the Act'), is preferred by the respondents before the Appellate Authority, Bagalkot, in Appeal No. LRA(TR) 597/1987. They are aggrieved by the order passed by the said authority on I.A. II which was filed by the appellant seeking that there should be an order restraining respondents 2,3 and 4 from interfering with his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the land in S.No. 204/1 in Joladagudda. Badami Taluk, Bijapur District.

(2.) Briefly stated the facts leading to the appeal and the impugned order are these: Respondent-1 in this revision petition filed an application in Form No.7 seeking occupancy rights in respect of 2/3 portion of Sy. No. 204/1 aforementioned. That application came to be rejected by the Land Tribunal. He questioned the same in this Court under Art.226 of the Constitution successfully. The order of the Land Tribunal was set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh disposal in accordance with the directions issued by this Court. When the matter was called on remand, as evidenced by the order of the Land Tribunal, Badami, it is clear that Eraiah was not present. In the result, ex parte decision was taken refusing him occupancy rights for the reasons recorded. Aggrieved by the same, he filed an appeal and also sought in I.A.II to restrain Respondent-1, the present revision petitioner from interfering with his peaceful possesion and cultivation. That application came to be allowed for the reasons recorded by the Appellate Authority.

(3.) The Appellate Authority had proceeded on the basis that the Record of Rights found in the records produced before the Land Tribunal clearly supported the case of the appellant that he was in possession and cultivation of portion of the land in dispute. The revision petitioners did not lead any evidence or produce any material to rebut the presumption arising under Sec. 133 of the Land Revenue Act to disprove the correctness of the entry in the Record of Rights or the R.T.C. register. Therefore, as a temporary measure, injunction has been issued in favour of the appellant pending disposal of the appeal.