NAGAMMA Vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal preferred by the third and the fourth respondents in the writ petition filed by the third respondent herein. The present appellants are claiming through the original grantee of the said land. The original grantee and his son executed the sale deed on 3rd May 1967. The sale deed was executed in favour of the third respondent's father. On 20th June 2011, an application was made by the present appellants under Section 5 of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 (for short, 'the PTCL Act') for resumption of the land.

(2.) The application was allowed by the Assistant Commissioner. The order of the Assistant Commissioner is confirmed in appeal. The third respondent challenged both the orders by filing a writ petition before the learned Single Judge which has been allowed and the orders have been set aside by the impugned order in this appeal. The learned Single Judge held that the application was filed by the present appellants 44 years after the alienation and 32 years after the said Act came into force and there was an inordinate delay in filing the application and it was not filed within a reasonable time.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the appellants submitted that the appellants were not aware about the provisions of the said Act and only after they became aware they have filed the application. His submission is that the appellants may be granted an opportunity to file an application for condonation of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act as at the relevant time when the application was filed, they were not aware of the requirements of filing such an application.