YALLAPPA Vs. SIDDAMALLAPPA GUBACHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Though this matter is listed for orders, I have heard the arguments on merits with the consent of both the parties. Since respondent Nos.3, 5 and 7 have also filed a memo for disposal of the petition on merits and the same has been objected by the counsel for petitioners by filing objections and counsel for petitioners has also filed IA.No.2/2014 for additional evidence and this Court vide order dated 19.03.2018, passed an order to be heard along with main petition. Hence, considered the matter on merits.

(2.) The petitioners in this petition invoking the writ jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of Cr.P.C., prayed this Court to issue a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other writ or direction and quash the order passed by the 1st respondent/Tahasildar, Jamkhandi dated 02.08.2012 passed under Section 145 of Cr.P.C. bearing No.MAG/Cr.P.C./26/2010-11, copy of which is annexed at Annexure-H and pass such other order or orders as this Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.

(3.) The factual matrix of the case is that the petitioners in the petition contends that they are in possession of the land in Sy.No.35 total measuring 5 acres 12 guntas out of 10 acres 34 guntas of Hanagandi village of Jamkhandi taluka of Bagalkote District from past 45 years as tenants. It is further contended that the petitioners filed an application in Form No.7A before the Assistant Commissioner, Jamkhandi for grant of land as a tenant vide Annexure-A. It is further contended that in pursuance of the submission of the Form No.7A, spot inspection in respect of the land in question was conducted and panchanama was drawn in the presence of the elders which clearly showed that the petitioners are in possession of the land in question vide Annexure-B. The other contention that in the meanwhile, the Assistant Commissioner passed an order to reject the application and same was pending consideration before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, Bengaluru and in the meanwhile, the private respondents filed a suit in OS No.4/2004 before the Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.), Banahatti, praying for an order of permanent injunction restraining the petitioners from peaceful possession and enjoyment of the land. The trial Court erroneously and without considering the possession of the petitioners, decreed the suit and copy of the judgment is placed as Annexure-C.