- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12633 WP No. 102547 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO.102547 OF 2015 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: SHRI. JINNAPPA S/O NEMAPPA BETAGERI AGE. 53 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O DEVARASHIGIHALLI, TQ. BAILHONGAL, DIST. BELAGAVI. - PETITIONER (BY SRI. CHETAN MUNNOLI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, HESCOM, NAVANAGAR, HUBBALLI, DIST. DHARWAD. 2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELEC.), HESCOM, BAILHONGAL, TQ. BAILHONGAL, DIST. BELAGAVI. - RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.S. KAMATE, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION QUASHING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 31.12.2014 AND 08.01.2015 RESPECTIVELY, IN O.P.NO.10/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE PERMANENT LOK ADALAT, BELAGAVI, PRODUCED AS PER ANNEXURES ‘A’ AND ‘B’, RESPECTIVELY & ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV Digitally signed by VINAYAKA B V Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12633 WP No. 102547 of 2015 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV) The present writ petition has been filed seeking issuance of writ of certiorari to set aside the judgment and award of the Permanent Lok Adalath in O.P. No. 10/2012 dated 31.12.2014 and 08.01.2015. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that a claim was lodged before the Permanent Lok Adalath in light of damage caused due to electric short circuit as regards the sugarcane crop cultivated by the petitioner in Sy. No. 109/3 measuring 3 acres 26 guntas which was destroyed consequent to such fire. 3. It is pointed out that the Permanent Lok Adalath has disposed the claim petition in No. 10/2012 on the sole ground of ambiguity regarding the entitlement in light of the entries in the revenue records relating to Sy. No. 109/3. 4. It is further submitted that the Permanent Lok Adalath had recorded a finding that petitioner had furnished M.E. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12633 WP No. 102547 of 2015 No. 2364 pertaining to Sy. No. 109/3 and in absence of that it had declined to entertain the claim petition. It is also submitted that M.E. No. 2634 is now produced at Annexure- F which would show name of the petitioner as regards an extent of 3 acres 26 guntas in Sy. No. 109/3 and the Permanent Lok Adalath may be directed to reconsider the matter. 5. Learned counsel Sri B.S. Kamate submitted that it is the burden on the petitioner to have made out a clear entitlement before the Permanent Lok Adalath and the documents produced at this stage cannot have the effect of improving the case of the petitioner. 6. It is submitted that the Court ought not to consider remand of the matter at this late stage wherein much time has passed between the order of the Permanent Lok Adalath in the year 2014 till date. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12633 WP No. 102547 of 2015 7. The order of the Permanent Lok Adalath relating to No. 10/2012 reads as follows: “17. O.P. NO. 10/2012 : PW2 is the petitioner of this case. According to his evidence sugarcane crop measuring 3 acres 26 guntas in survey No. 109/3 was burnt in the fire incident in question. Ex.P.17 is the RTC of survey No. 109/3 which shows the name of the petitioner Jinnappa as the owner of the said land. However, in the cultivators column name of certain Paris Irappa Betageri is mentioned. From the father’s name of the said name mentioned in the cultivators column it clearly appears that he is not the own brother of the petitioner Jinnappa. Column No. 10 of Ex.P.17 shows that there was a partition in the family and as per the said partition M.E. No. 2634 was certified. In our considered opinion, the petitioner ought to have produced the said M.E. No. 2364 to show that the said partition in survey no. 109/3 has fallen to his share. Further, the petitioner has not explained as to why the name of Paris Irappa Betageri is shown in the cultivators column. Admittedly, the said Paris Irappa Betageri has not filed any petition. Therefore, we are not inclined to award any compensation in this case.” 8. It is clear that the Permanent Lok Adalath was not convinced regarding the entitlement of the claimant. It had noticed the name of Paris Erappa Betageri in the cultivator’s - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12633 WP No. 102547 of 2015 column. It is observed that the claimant had not explained as to why the name of Paris Erappa Betageri is shown in the cultivator’s column. It is to be noticed that in terms of Annexure-F which is Form No. 6 as regards M.E. No. 2364, name of the petitioner is shown to an extent of 3 acres 26 guntas in Sy. No. 109/3 and the name of Erappa Channappa is shown as regards 2 acres 5 guntas in Sy. No. 109/3. 9. As rightly pointed by the counsel for the petitioner, entitlement is that of a person who has title and such title is reflected by M.E. No. 2364. In light of the claim being rejected only on the ground of ambiguity regarding entitlement and in light of discussion made above, the order passed in O.P. No. 10/2012 is set aside and the matter is remitted for fresh consideration. The petitioner is herewith permitted to place fresh records in support of his claim including as those produced along with the writ petition. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12633 WP No. 102547 of 2015 Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed off. All contentions are kept open. Sd/- (S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE BVV, ct:vp LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 5