K MOHIYUDDIN KHAN Vs. A N MALLIKARJUNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision under Section 121-A of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 ('the Act in short') is by the unsuccessful tenant- applicant who failed to get occupancy rights both before the Land Tribunal Alur Taluk, Hassan District as well as the Appellate Authority constituted under the Act for Hassan District.

(2.) The Tribunal found that the applicant- Revision Petitioner had opportunity to manipulate the Record of Rights and shown his own name as cultivator in the relevant column of the R.T.C. register. The conclusion was further strengthened by the fact that there were numerous contradictions in the testimony of the applicant before the Land Tribunal. He, for instance, admitted that the land which he took on lease from one Nagarajappa was previously tenanted by one Harijan who died. He also stated that he took it on lease in 1972. Again in the cross- examination he admitted that he was cultivating the land for about six years prior to the date of his giving evidence which would make it the year 1968. The oral evidence which he adduced in support of his tenancy was disbelieved by the Tribunal as it found that the applicant- revision petitioner allowed the witness to cultivate the land as a reward. Further, corroborating evidence was held to be tutored whose testimony could not be relied upon.

(3.) In such matters the trial Court or Tribunal, as the case may be, which recorded the findings is best judge of the evidence.