Sri Chandrappa v. Sri Venkatesh

((((((((((((HC-KAR, NC:(2026:KHC:40259-DB( WA(No.(1680(of(2024( ( ,,,,,,,,,, , CNR:(KAHC010653092024( ( ( IN(THE(HIGH(COURT(OF(KARNATAKA(AT(BENGALURU(

ST DATED(THIS(THE(31 (DAY(OF(JULY,(2026(

PRESENT(

THE(HON'BLE(MR.(JUSTICE(D(K(SINGH(

AND((

THE(HON'BLE(MR.(JUSTICE(T.M.NADAF(

WRIT(APPEAL(NO.(1680(OF(2024((LR)(

(

BETWEEN:((

, SRI,CHANDRAPPA,,

, S/O,LATE.MOTAMUNIYAPPA,, SINCE,DECEASED,BY,HIS,LR'S,, ,

1., SMT.,LAKSHMAMMA,,, W/O,LATE.,CHANDRAPPA,,, AGED,ABOUT,56,YEARS,,

,

2., SRI.,MUNIRAJU,, S/O,LATE.CHANDRAPPA,, Digitally AGED,ABOUT,37,YEARS,, signedtiby ,REKHA0R

3., SMT.,AMBIKA,, Location: High D/O,LATE.,CHANDRAPPA,,, Courttiof AGED,ABOUT,33,YEARS,,Karnataka ,

4., SRI.,C.,VENKATESH,, S/O,LATE.CHANDRAPPA,,, AGED,ABOUT,30,YEARS,, ,

5., SRI.,C.,NARAYANA,, S/O,LATE.CHANDRAPPA,,, AGED,ABOUT,28,YEARS,, , ((((((((((((HC-KAR, NC:(2026:KHC:40259-DB( WA(No.(1680(of(2024( ( ,,,,,,,,,, , CNR:(KAHC010653092024( ( ( ALL,ARE,RESIDING,AT:, R/AT,KONADASAPURA,VILLAGE,,, BIDARAHALLI,HOBLI,,, BENGALURU,EAST,TALUK,,, BENGALURU,-,560,049., …APPELLANTS, (BY,SRI.,SATISH,K.,,ADVOCATE), AND:( (

1., SRI.,VENKATESH,, S/O,LATE.,SRI.,NAIKARA,EERAPPA,,, AGED,ABOUT,57,YEARS,,, RESIDING,AT,NO.76/2,,, KONADASAPURA,VILLAGE,,, BIDARAHALLI,HOBLI,,, BENGALURU,EAST,TALUK,-,560,120., ,

2., SRI.,RAJAPPA,, S/O,LATE.,SRI.NAIKARA,EERAPPA,,, AGED,ABOUT,56,YEARS,,, RESIDING,AT,NO.76/1,,, KONADASAPURA,VILLAGE,,, BIDARAHALLI,HOBLI,,, BENGALURU,EAST,TALUK,-,560,120., ,

3., SRI.,VENKATARAM,, S/O,LATE.,SRI.NAIKARA,EERAPPA,,, AGED,ABOUT,57,YEARS,,, RESIDING,AT,NO.76/1,,, KONADASAPURA,VILLAGE,,, BIDARAHALLI,HOBLI,,, BENGALURU,EAST,TALUK,-,560,120., ,

4., SRI.,NAGENDRANATH,, S/O,SRI.,Y.N,NARAYANA,REDDY,,, AGED,ABOUT,62,YEARS,,, ((((((((((((HC-KAR, NC:(2026:KHC:40259-DB( WA(No.(1680(of(2024( ( ,,,,,,,,,, , CNR:(KAHC010653092024( ( ( , RESIDING,AT,NO.29,,, LAKSHMI,NARASIMHASWAMY,NILAYA,,, NDGANGOTHRI,2 ,,MAIN,ROAD,,, KRISHNARAJAPURAM,NEW,EXTENSION,,, BENGALURU,-,560,036., ,

5., SMT.,NAGAMANI,, D/O,LATE.,MUNISWAMAPPA,,, AGED,ABOUT,51,YEARS,,, RESIDING,AT:,, KONADASAPURA,VILLAGE,,, BIDARAHALLI,HOBLI,,, BENGALURU,EAST,TALUK,,, BENGALURU,-,560,049., ,

6., SRI.,NARAYANASWAMY,, S/O,SRI.,BADDIGAPPA,,, AGED,ABOUT,53,YEARS,,, RESIDING,AT,NO.76/1,,, KONADASAPURA,VILLAGE,,, BIDARAHALLI,HOBLI,,, BENGALURU,EAST,TALUK,,, BENGALURU,-,560,120., ,

7., THE,STATE,OF,KARNATAKA,, BY,ITS,SECRETARY,,, REVENUE,DEPARTMENT,,, M.S.,BUILDING,,, DR.AMEDKAR,VEEDHI,,, BENGALURU,-,560,001., ,

8., THE,LAND,TRIBUNAL,, BENGALURU,NORTH,(ADDL),TALUK,,, BENGALURU,-,560,009., ,

9., THE,ASSISTANT,COMMISSIONER,, BENGALURU,NORTH,SUB-DIVISION,,, ((((((((((((HC-KAR, NC:(2026:KHC:40259-DB( WA(No.(1680(of(2024( ( ,,,,,,,,,, , CNR:(KAHC010653092024( ( ( D.C,OFFICE,COMPLEX,,, NEAR,CAUVERY,BHAVAN,,, BENGALURU,,-,560,001., ,

10., THE,SPECIAL,TAHASILDAR,, BENGALURU,EAST,TALUK,,, K.R,PURAM,,, BENGALURU,-,560,043., …RESPONDENTS, ,,(BY,SRI.,PRASANNA,KUMAR,P.,,ADVOCATE,FOR,R1,TO,R3,, SRI.,NAGENDRANATH,S.D.,,ADVOCATE,FOR,R4,, SRI.,B.,RAVINDRANATH,,AGA,FOR,R7,TO,R10,, R5,AND,R6,ARE,SERVED,AND,UNREPRESENTED), , THIS,WRIT,APPEAL,IS,FILED,UNDER,SECTION,4,OF,THE, KARNATAKA,HIGH,COURT,ACT,,1961,,PRAYING,TO,SET,ASIDE, THE, IMPUGNED, ORDER, DATED:21.03.2024, PASSED, BY, THE, LEARNED, SINGLE, JUDGE, OF, THIS, HON'BLE, HIGH, COURT, OF, KARNATAKA, IN, WP, No.8410/2013, (LR), AND, GRANT, SUCH, OTHER,OR,DIRECTIONS,AS,THIS,HON'BLE,COURT,DEEMS,FIT, UNDER, THE, CIRCUMSTANCES, OF, THE, CASE,, INCLUDING, COSTS,,IN,THE,INTEREST,OF,JUSTICE,AND,EQUITY.,, THIS,APPEAL,IS,COMING,ON,FOR,FINAL,HEARING,,THIS, DAY,,JUDGMENT,WAS,DELIVERED,THEREIN,AS,UNDER:, CORAM:, ,HON'BLE,MR.,JUSTICE,D,K,SINGH, ,and,, ,HON'BLE,MR.,JUSTICE,T.M.NADAF,

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M. NADAF) The legal representatives of Chandrappa - respondent No.7 in W.P.No.8410/2013 are before us, assailing the order dated 21.03.2024 passed by the Writ Court.

¶2The Writ Court under the impugned order, allowed the Writ Petition and granted the reliefs sought for.

¶3The parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Writ Court.

¶4Facts germane to file the present appeal are as under:

4.1 What transpires from the record is, Nagamani, Narayana Swamy and Chandrappa were before the Writ Court in W.P.No.47263-265/2011 seeking for direction to the Tribunal to consider application filed

by their fathers respectively in Form No.7 for grant of occupancy right in respect of Sy.No.24 of Konadasapura Village, Bidarahalli Hobli, Bangalroe East Taluk.

4.2 The Government pleader appearing for the State in the said Writ petition had submitted that the case of the petitioners has already been considered for grant of occupancy rights and therefore, the claim of the petitioners was not genuine. Nevertheless, the Writ Court passed the order on 05.06.2012, disposing the Writ Petitions with the observation that, if the predecessor of the petitioners had filed Form No.7 at the relevant point of time as per the records and if the Tribunal has not considered the same, the same may be considered in accordance with law.

4.3 Thereafter, the Land Tribunal passed orders in favor of the Writ Petitioners in the Writ Petitions stated afore. The order passed by the Land Tribunal was

subject matter in batch of Writ Petitions including W.P.No.8410/2013, dated

29.01.2013 (wrongly mentioned as 29.01.2012), confirming occupancy rights to an extent of land in Sy.No.24.

4.4 Before the Writ Court, it was contended by the petitioners that the Tribunal has failed to consider the direction in its true spirit. The direction issued by the Writ Court in the Writ Petitions afore was the Land Tribunal has to ascertain whether there were applications filed by the petitioners' predecessors and then to proceed to hold enquiry and pass appropriate orders. However, without verifying as to whether any Form No.7 has been filed or not, the Tribunal has passed the orders.

4.5 Per contra, the contesting respondents submitted that the petitioners have no locus standi to question the order passed by the Land Tribunal.

4.6 The Writ Court after considering the arguments, held that the contention of the contesting respondents cannot be countenanced. The Writ Court further observed that the earlier Writ Petition stated afore was disposed of directing the Land Tribunal to verify as to whether the petitioners' predecessors have filed any Form No.7 at the relevant point of time and if not considered, to consider the same in accordance with law.

4.7 The Writ Court has categorically stated that in so far as Munishamappa, Baddigappa and Motamuniyappa are concerned, as per the order dated 09.11.2010 the Land Tribunal has come to a conclusion that said persons have not filed application in Form No.7. In that view of the matter, the Land Tribunal could not have considered the plea of Chandrappa and others, who claim under Motamuniyappa, as the claim made by their father before the Tribunal has already been considered and rejected. However, the order passed

on 09.11.2010 was not under challenge. Having considered these aspects of the matter, the Writ Court was of the opinion that the order dated

29.01.2013 (wrongly mentioned as 29.01.2012) passed by the Land Tribunal is not sustainable and subsequent action for phodi and durasth at the hands of the Survey Settlement authorities or the revenue authorities also cannot be sustained. Accordingly, allowed the Writ Petition along with other petitions and passed the common order. It is this common order passed by the Writ Court, is called in question in this appeal.

¶5Heard, Sri.Satish.K, learned counsel appearing for the appellants, Sri.Prasanna Kumar.P, learned counsel appearing for respondents 1 to 3, Sri.Nagendranath.S.D, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.4 and Sri.B.Ravindranath, learned Additional Government Advocate, appearing for the State.

¶6Having considered the rival submissions, we are of the opinion that the only question which is involved in the Writ Appeal is that, whether the appellants' predecessor-in-interest has filed Form No.7 seeking occupancy rights in respect of the land measuring 02 Acres in Sy.No.24 situated at Konadasapura Village, Bidarahalli Hobli, Bangalroe East Taluk, in view of the findings recorded by the Writ Court as against the finding recorded by the Tribunal in the impugned order dated

29.01.2012 stating that the Mota Muniyappa, predecessor under whom Chandrappa and the appellants herein claim rights, did not file the applications in Form No.7.

¶7In order to ascertain the veracity of distinct findings, we have directed the learned Additional Government Advocate to secure original land records. Learned AGA had furnished the original records before the Land Tribunal in respect of the subject land. With the help of learned AGA, we have perused the entire records. There is no Form No.7 found in the entire record.

¶8From this it is clear that, the Writ Court is right in holding that, there is no Form No.7 filed by Mota Muniyappa under whom Chandrappa and now the appellants herein claiming right.

¶9Though Sri.Satish.K, in feeble voice tried to impress upon us by means of certified copy of purported Form No.7 alleged to have been filed. In view of categorical firm stand of the Government and from the records, since there is no corresponding original record found, we decline to consider the submission of Sri.Satish.K.

¶10The non-filing of Form No.7 goes to the roots of the claim. In view of non-filing of Form No.7, the Land Tribunal erred in granting occupancy rights. In that view of the matter, we are of the considered opinion that the Writ Court having considered the entire fact in right perspective, allowed the Writ Petition. We find no infirmities in the order passed by the Writ Court. The Writ

Appeal sans merits and is dismissed. However, costs made easy.

¶11In view of dismissal of the Writ Appeal, pending interlocutory applications, if any, stands disposed of.

Sd/- (D K SINGH) JUDGE

Sd/- (T.M.NADAF) JUDGE TKN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20 ct-vn