- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4835 WP No. 60207 of 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M.G.UMA WRIT PETITION NO. 60207 OF 2010 (LR-) BETWEEN: 1. RAMAPPA S/O. LATE. BHARAMAPPA TALAVAR SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE 1A) SIDDAVVA RAMAPPA TALWAR, AGE: YEARS, R/O. SOUNDATTI ONI, UNAKAL, TQ: HUBLI, DIST: DHARWAD. 2. TALAVAR NINGAVVA W/O. HANUMANTHAPPA SINCE DECEASED BY HER LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE 2a) MARUTHI S/O. HANUMANTHAPPA TALAWAR, AGE: 53 YEARS, R/O. UNAKAL, SOUNDATTI ONI, TQ: HUBLI, DIST: DHARWAD. 2b) [SIDDAPPA S/O. HANUMANTHAPPA TALAWAR AGE: 51 YEARS, R/O. UNAKAL, SOUNDATTI ONI, TQ: HUBLI, DIST: DHARWAD. SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR’S 2(b)(1) SAVITA W/O. SIDDAPPA WALIKAR AGE: 40, OCC: HOUSEWIFE/AGRI 2(b)(2) VINAYAKA S/O. SIDDAPPA WALIKAR, AGE: 25, OCC: STUDENT, 2(b)(3) ADARSH S/O. SIDDAPPA WALIKAR, AGE: 22, OCC:STUDENT Digitally signed by V N BADIGER Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4835 WP No. 60207 of 2010 [THE PETITIONERS 2(B)(1) TO 2(B)(3) ARE R/O. SAVADATTI ONI, UNAKAL-580028. TQ: HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAR] 2c) BARAMAPPA S/O. HANUMANTHAPPA TALAWAR, AGE: 44 YEARS, R/O. UNAKAL, SOUNDATTI ONI, TQ: HUBLI, DIST: DHARWAD. 2d) KALLAPPA S/O. HANUMANTHAPPA TALAWAR, AGE: 40 YEARS, R/O. UNAKAL, SOUNDATTI ONI, TQ: HUBLI, DIST: DHARWAD. 2e) SMT. PARASANNANAVARA PARAVVA W/O. HANUMANTHAPPA PARASANNAVARA AGE: 60 YEARS, R/O. UNAKAL, SOUNDATTI ONI, TQ: HUBLI, DIST: DHARWAD. 2f) SIDDAVVA W/O. MAHADEV AGE: 56 YEARS, R/O. UNAKAL, SOUNDATTI ONI, TQ: HUBLI, DIST: DHARWAD. 2g) LAXMI W/O. SOMANNA AGE: 48 YEARS, R/O. UNAKAL, SOUNDATTI ONI, TQ: HUBLI, DIST: DHARWAD. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. D.M.BANDI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MALLAPPA KITTUR @ SHIVALLI, SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR’S 1a) NINGAPPA S/O. MALLAPPA KITTUR @ SHIVALLI AGE: 53 YEARS, R/O. NAVALUR, TQ & DIST: DHARWAD. 1b) NAGAPPA S/O. MALLAPPA KITTUR @ SHIVALLI - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4835 WP No. 60207 of 2010 AGE: 48 YEARS, R/O. NAVALUR, TQ & DIST: DHARWAD. 1c) SMT. PAKIRAVVA W/O. SHANKRAPPA HOLI, AGE: 56 YEARS, R/O. NAVALUR, TQ & DIST: DHARWAD. 2. SMT. ADARAGUNCHI MUDEVVA W/O. MADAPPA, AGE: MAJOR, R/O. AT BENNUR, TQ: NAVALGUND, DIST: DHARWAD. 3. ADARAGUNCHI GANGAVVA W/O. SHANKRAPPA AGE: 68 YEARS, R/O: AT/PO:RAMNAL, TQ: KALAGHATAGI, DIST: DHARWAD. 4. THE LAND TRIBUNAL DHARWAD REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIRMAN DHARWAD. 5. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, M. S. BUILDING, BENGALURU. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. F V PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R1(A TO C); R2 & R3 – NOTICE DISPENSED WITH; SRI. T. HANUMAREDDY, AGA FOR R4 & R5) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF WRIT TO QUASH THE ORDER NO.KLR/NVL/SR-78 PASSED BY THE LAND TRIBUNAL DHARWAD ON 14.02.1979, THE COPY OF WHICH HAS BEEN PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4835 WP No. 60207 of 2010 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M.G.UMA ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioners have approached this Court seeking issuance of writ in the nature of Certiorari to quash the order dated 14.02.1979, passed by the land Tribunal, produced as per Annexure-A and remand the matter to the land Tribunal for fresh consideration. 2. Heard Sri. D.M.Bandi, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri.F.V.Patil, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1(A to C) and Sri.T.Hanumareddy, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.4 and 5. Perused the materials on record. 3. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that, one Mallappa father of respondent No.1 (A) to 1(C) filed Form No.7 in respect of Block No.29 of Navalur village, measuring 2 acres 35 guntas showing Smt.Iravva W/o. Irappa Talwar, - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4835 WP No. 60207 of 2010 Yellappa, Hanumanthppa, Ramappa S/o. Bharmappa, Muddevva W/o. Muddeppa Adargunchi, Smt.Gangavva W/o. Irappa Adargunchi as owners and claiming occupancy rights against them. Contesting respondents are claiming rights under the said Mallappa. A suit was filed in O.S.No.46/2009 by respondent Nos.1(A) to 1(C) seeking permanent injunction in respect of above said 2 acres 35 guntas of land. Para 2 of the plaint discloses that the plaintiffs in the said suit made allegations that, even though Form No.7 was filed in respect of Block No.29 of Navalur village along with two other properties, no order was passed by the Land Tribunal in respect of Block No.29, even though an order was passed in respect of other two items of properties. 4. According to the petitioners, Annexure-G is the representation filed by the very same Mallappa dated 20.03.1984, before the Land Tribunal, complaining that no order was passed in respect of Block No.29, - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4835 WP No. 60207 of 2010 even though an order was passed in respect of two other items of properties. But strangely in O.S.No.46/2009, a memo was filed on 15.12.2009, producing the impugned order, contending that an order was passed on 14.02.1979 itself conferring occupancy right in favour of Mallappa. 5. The documents produced before the Court as well as the original records secured by learned Additional Government Advocate substantiate these contentions taken by the petitioners. However, it is the contention of the contesting respondents that, initially Form No.7 was filed against the owner by name Karevva and the petitioners are not related to said Karevva, since the names of Smt.Iravva W/o.Irappa Talwar, Yellappa, Hanumanthppa, Ramappa S/o. Bharmappa and others were shown as respondents in the impugned order produced as per Annexure-A was on the basis of the entries found in the record of rights. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4835 WP No. 60207 of 2010 6. My attention was drawn to the endorsement found on the notice issued by Land Tribunal to Karevva. It is endorsed that, Karevva had died on 05.01,1979 itself. But the impugned order is said to have been passed on 14.02.1979. Prima facie it is an order against dead person without impleading the legal representatives of Karevva. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that, the order dated 14.02.1979 is a concocted order. He points out that, the signatures found on the order sheet dated 14.02.1979, maintained by the Land Tribunal differs from the signature found on the impugned order at Annexure-A. 8. Even though it is contended by the counsel for the contesting respondents, that the signature found on the statement of the tenant recorded by the Land Tribunal, and on the impugned order passed by the Land Tribunal bears similar signatures, I am not impressed with the genuinity of the order produced - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4835 WP No. 60207 of 2010 as per Annexure-A, as the order dated 14.02.1979 bears entirely different signature. 9. I find considerable force in the contention taken by the learned counsel for the petitioners and there are prima facie materials to substantiate the fact that there is manipulation of records before the Land Tribunal. Therefore, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case for quashing the impugned order at Annexure- A, and to remand the matter to the Land Tribunal, Dharwad, for fresh consideration. 10. Accordingly I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i. Writ Petition is allowed. ii. The impugned order dated 14.02.1979 passed by the Land Tribunal, Dharwad, at Annexure-A, is quashed. - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4835 WP No. 60207 of 2010 iii. The mater is remanded back to the Land Tribunal, Dharwad, for fresh consideration. iv. The parties are directed to appear before the Land Tribunal on 07.05.2025, without waiting for fresh notice. v. All contentions raised by the rival parties are kept open to be considered by the Land Tribunal. In view of disposal of the main petition, pending I.As. stands disposed off. Sd/- (M.G.UMA) JUDGE VB - upto para 4 gab – para 5 to end CT:ANB List No.: 2 Sl No.: 4