BELLAPPA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is the revision under Section 115 of the Civil Procedure code from the Judgment and Order dated 1st april, 1992 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kolar, in M. A. No. 82/ 88. Bellappa and two others v. State (2)Tahsildar, Bangarpet and Annaiah, whereby the District Judge, dismissed the present revisionists appeal and has confirmed the order of the Tahsildar where the Tahsildar had rejected the claim of the appellant in case No. 2527 78-79. The appellants claimed to be the valid holder of the Village Office i. e. , that they were the authorised holder of the office.

(2.) THE revisionist applicants claim themselves to be the daughters grand-son of one !,achumaga It will be appropriate at this stage to give the genealogy tree as per the claim made by the revisionist applicant. It is as under:<IMG>sw5.jpg</IMG>

(3.) THE claimant being the great grand son (being the daughter's grand son) claiming himself to be entitled to hold the village office, in every case along with great grand son (son's grand son) of Lachumoga namely respondent no. 3.