Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 45057 (KAR)

BEERAPPA LOKAPPA NAIK v. THE LAND TRIBUNAL

WP/102787/2018 · 2025-03-03

M G Uma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4146 WP No. 102787 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M.G.UMA WRIT PETITION NO. 102787 OF 2018 (KLR-RR/SUR) BETWEEN: BEERAPPA LOKAPPA NAIK, AGE: 76 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: SHIRAKULI, TQ: ANKOLA, DIST: UTTARA KANNADA. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. P. R. BENTUR, ADVOCATE-(ABSENT) AND: 1. THE LAND TRIBUNAL REPRESENTED BY CHAIRMAN, KARWAR, DIST: UTTARA KANNADA. 2. THE TAHASILDAR, ANKOLA DIST: UTTARA KANNADA. 3. DINGU TIPPA NAIK AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: SHIRAKULI, TQ: ANKOLA, DIST: UTTARA KANNADA. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. T.HANUMAREDDY, AGA FOR R1 & R2) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS BY DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.2 TO ENTER THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER IN THE RECORD OF RIGHTS IN RESPECT OF 0-3-0 ACRES OF LAND OUT OF 0-7-0 ACRES OF LAND IN BLOCK NO.36 SITUATED AT SHIRAKULI VILLAGE, TALUK ANKOLA, DISTRICT UTTARA KANNADA AS PER THE FORM NO.7 AT ANNEXURE DATED 17.08.1974 AND AS PER THE APPLICATION OF THE PETITIONER TO RESPONDENT NO.2 AT ANNEXURE-M DATED 04.10.2016. MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4146 WP No. 102787 of 2018 THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M.G.UMA ORAL ORDER Learned counsel for the petitioner is absent. No representation, even though the matter is passed over twice and again called out at 2.40 p.m. 2. The order sheet dated 04-06-2020 reads as under: “Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner died during the pendency of the writ petition. Hence, seeks for some time to bring on the LR’s. Four weeks’ time is granted to bring on the LR’s. 3. No steps are taken to implead legal representatives of the deceased sole petitioner. The writ petition is already abated long back. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as abated. Sd/- (M.G.UMA) JUDGE VB CT:ANB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7