Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 12904 (KAR)

ERAPPA TUMARIKOPPA v. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS

WP/3210/2018 · 2025-03-27

N S Sanjay Gowda

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:13139 WP No. 3210 of 2018 C/W WP No. 40036 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 3210 OF 2018 (LR) C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 40036 OF 2014 (LR-SEC 48A) IN WP No. 3210/2018 BETWEEN: 1. 1(a) ERAPPA TUMARIKOPPA S/O KERIYAPPA SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS LOKAPPA, S/O ERAPPA TUMARIKOPPA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS KATAVALLI VILLAGE, KERAHALLI POST, SORABA TALUK SHIMOGA DISTRICT-577419. 1(b) SHEKAMMA W/O LATE CHANDRAPPA AGED ABOUG 38 YEARS, KATAVALLI VILLAGE, KERAHALLI POST, SORABA TALUK SHIMOGA DISTRICT-577419 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. VEERENDRA R PATIL., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENTAL OF REVENUE VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU-560 001 Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:13139 WP No. 3210 of 2018 C/W WP No. 40036 of 2014 2. THE LAND TRIBUNAL BY ITS SECRETARY THE SPECIAL TAHAILDAR, SORABA TALUK SHIMOGGA DISTRICT-577429 3. 3(a) PRASAPPA S/O BHEEMAPPA SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS SOMAMA S/O PARASAPPA AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS KATAVALLI VILLAGE, KERAHALLI POST SORABA TALUK, SHIMOGA DISTRICT-577419. 3(b) BHEEMAPPA, S/O PARASAPPA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS KATAVALLI VILLAGE, KERAHALLI POST, SORABA TALUK SHIMOGA DISTRICT-577419. 3(c) HANUMANTHAPPA, S/O PARASAPPA AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS KATAVALLI VILLAGE, KERAHALLI POST SORABA TALUK SHIMOGA DISTRICT-577419 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. CHANDINI.S., HCGP., FOR R-1 & R-2; SRI. D.S.SHIVANANDA., ADVOCATE FOR R-3(a TO c)) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BYTHE R-2 IN VIDE ORDER DATED:10.11.1981 WHICH IS PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-H WHEREIN R-2 GRANTED THE OCCUPANCY RIGHT IN LAND IN QUESTION IN FAVOUR OF R-3, ETC. IN WP NO. 40036/2014: BETWEEN: 1. PARASAPPA - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:13139 WP No. 3210 of 2018 C/W WP No. 40036 of 2014 1(i) S/O BHEEMAPPA, SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS, SOMAMMA, W/O PARASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEAS, OCC:AGRICULTURE, 1(ii) BHEEMAPPA S/O PARASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE, 1(iii) HANUMANTHAPPA S/O PARASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE, PETITIONER 1(i) TO 1(iii) ARE R/AT KAOTHUVALLI VILLAGE, POST:KEREHALLI, SORAB TALUK, SHIMOGA DISTRICT 1(iv) RENUKAMMA W/O SHIVAPPA AND D/O PARASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 41 AYEARS, OCC:HOUSE HOLD WORK, R/P LPDOLPA VOAGE. POST:THALAGODDI, SORAB TALUK, SHIMOGA DISTRICT. POST:THALAGODDI, SORAB TALUK, SHIMOGA DISTRICT. 1(v) JAYAMMA, W/O GUTHYAPPA AND D/O PARASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, OCC:HOUSE HOLD WORK, R/O KOULI VILLAGE, POST:THEGARSI, SHIKARIPURA TALUK, SHIMOGA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONERS (BY SRI. D.S.SHIVANANDA., ADVOCATE) - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:13139 WP No. 3210 of 2018 C/W WP No. 40036 of 2014 AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560 001. 2. THE LAND TRIBUNAL, SORAB BY ITS SECRETARY, THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, SORAB TALUK, SHIMOGA DISTRICT-577429. 3. 3(i) ERAPPA THUMARIKOPPA S/O KERIYAPPA- SINCE DIED BY HIS LRS. ERAMMA, W/O ERAPPA THUMARIKOPPA, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE. SINCE DIED BY HIS LRS. R-3(ii) and R-3(iii) LRs OF DECEASED R-3(i) WHO ARE ALREADY ON RECORD. 3(ii) LOKAPPA S/O ERAPPA THUMARIKOPPA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE, 3(iii) SHEKAMMA W/O LATE CHANDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK, ALL 3(i) TO 3(iii) ALL ARE R/AT KATHUVALLI VILLAGE, POST:KEREHALLI, SORAB TALUK, SHIMOGA DISTRICT-577429. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. CHANDINI.S., HCGP., FOR R-1 & R-2; SRI. VEERENDRA.R. PATIL., ADVOCATE FOR R-3(2 & 3) - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:13139 WP No. 3210 of 2018 C/W WP No. 40036 of 2014 R-3(i) IS DECEASED AND R-3(ii) & R-3(iii) ARE HER LRs., (VIDE ORDER DATED 27.03.2025) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER ANNEXURE-F, DATED:20.10.1981, PASSED BY THE LAND TRIBUNAL, SORAB IN CASE NO.TNC.VR.126/74-75 [VRNO.110/74-75] & ALSO QUASH THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE VIDE ANNEXURE-G, IN FORM NO.10, DATED:20.12.1990, ISSUED IN FAVOUR OF THE RESPONDENT- ERAPPA, ETC. THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA ORAL ORDER 1. WP.40036/2014 is filed challenging the order of the Land Tribunal by which occupancy rights were conferred in favour of the 3rd respondent i.e., the petitioner in the connected WP.3210/2018. This order was passed on 20.10.1981. 2. WP.3210/2018 is filed challenging the order of the Land Tribunal conferring occupancy rights in favour of the petitioner in WP.40036/2014 by an order dated 10.11.1981. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:13139 WP No. 3210 of 2018 C/W WP No. 40036 of 2014 3. The Land Tribunal has passed the order conferring occupancy rights in favour of the petitioner in WP.40036/2014 and also the petitioner in WP.No.3210/2018. 4. In other words, in respect of same land, two orders were passed conferring occupancy rights on two different applications. In my view, these orders of the Land Tribunal cannot therefore be sustained. The Land Reforms Rules categorically states that if more than one application for grant of same land is made, it becomes the duty of the Land Tribunal to club both the applications, consider the same and thereafter pass appropriate orders. Obviously, in the instant case, said procedure has not been followed. Consequently, it would be appropriate to set aside the order passed in favour of petitioners in both these petitions and remand the matter to the Tribunal with a direction to it to club both the applications, consider the same on their merits and - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:13139 WP No. 3210 of 2018 C/W WP No. 40036 of 2014 thereafter pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 5. The writ petitions are accordingly allowed. 6. Since both the parties are represented before this Court, they are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 29.04.2025 without expecting any further notice. Sd/- (N S SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE PKS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 48