THIMMAPPA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This matter has come up for orders for modification on 23-5-1988. I directed that the matter itself may be posted for orders today so that the petition itself shall be disposed of after hearing the Counsel for parties. I have heard the Counsel on both sides. The revision petition is directed against the order passed by the Appellate Authority, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore, constituted under the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961, (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The order is dated 30th April, 1988 and is passed on IA.No. 3. I.A.No. 3 was filed by the appellant before the Appellate Authority who is respondent-5 in this proceeding.

(2.) That application was an application purported to be one made under Order 40 Rule 1 of the C.P.C. seeking appointment of a receiver in respect of the disputed land on the ground that the revision petitioner who claimed to be the owner of the land was disturbing the cultivation and proper management of the cocoanut garden and therefore without the protection of the Court, he could not continue to carry on the act of management of the property in dispute and as such the Appellate Authority, should appoint a receiver.

(3.) The revision petitioner-owner filed his objections inter alia contending that the Land Tribunal apart from rejecting the application of the appellant - 5th respondent had also recorded a finding that as on 1-3-1974 he was not in possession of the land. On the other hand, the Land Tribunal had recorded a finding that every thing pointed towards the revision petitioner being in possession of the land since purchase of the land in the year 1972 as evidenced by the record of rights entry for the years 1972-73 and 1973-74.