BOODA POOJARI Vs. THOMU POOJARTHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this matter coming up for admission after notice, a very important question has been raised by the petitioner and having regard to the numerous matters pending before various Land Reforms Appellate Authorities, this revision is disposed of by the following order finally.

(2.) The petitioner was the tenant - appellant before the Appellate Authority, Udupl, in LRA.73 of 1987 on its file. The appellant filed two applications which were numbered as I.As. 1 and 2. I.A.1 was under Section 119(2) of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), praying for stay of the operation of the order dated 28-9-1987 passed by the Land Tribunal, Udupl, in proceedings under the Act for registration of occupancy rights. I.A.2 was one purporting to have been made under Order 39 Rules 1 to 3 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking an injunction directing respondents 1 and 2 in the appeal before the Appellate Authority from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the appellant of the lands in dispute.

(3.) As evidenced by the reasoning adopted by the Appellate Authority found in para 13 of the order it allowed I.A.1 holding that the power is specifically conferred upon it to stay the order of the Land Tribunal, but dismissed I.A.2 on the ground that power is not specifically conferred on the Appellate Authority and therefore it cannot issue temporary injunction, despite attention being drawn to Section 117 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Therefore, the appellant aggrieved by the dismissal of I.A.2 has approached this Court inter-alia contending that the Appellate Authority has failed to exercise the jurisdiction vested in it and therefore, the order calls for interference and appropriate directions to the Appellate Authority.