- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45667 WP No. 39290 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K WRIT PETITION NO. 39290 OF 2016 (LR) BETWEEN: SRI. GANESH SOMANATH SOMANI AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, S/O. LATE SRI. SOMANATH SOMANI, GANESH KRUPA, NEAR HEBBAGILA MANE MANGANESE ROAD, POST: GANGOLLI VILLAGE, KUNDAPURA TALUK-567 201. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. CHANDRANATH ARIGA K, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, VIKASA SOUDHA, DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001. 2. THE CHAIRMAN LAND TRIBUNAL, Digitally signed by PANKAJA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45667 WP No. 39290 of 2016 KUNDAPURA-576 201, UDUPI DISTRICT. 3. SMT. LAKSHMI MOGERTHI(SINCE DECEASED) W/O. LATE SRI. SOMA MOGERA, AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS, KATTE BELTHUR VILLAGE, KUNDAPURA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT. 3(a) MR. SHEENA NAIKA S/O LATE SOMA MUGERA KATTBELTHURU VILLAGE HEMMADY KUNDAPURA TALUK UDUPI DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. NEELAKANTAPPA K PUJAR, HCGP FOR R1 & R2, R3(a) - SERVED, UNREPRESENTED) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO.CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN TRI 5019/5020/81-82 ON THE FILE OF THE R-2. QUASH THE PROCEEDIGNS IN TRI 5019/5020/81-82 ON THE FILE OF THE R-2 VIDE ANNEX-F. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45667 WP No. 39290 of 2016 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K ORAL ORDER In this writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the proceedings in TRI.5019/5020/81-82 on the file of respondent No.2. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is the purchaser of land bearing Sy.No.167/1 measuring 1 acre situated at Kattebelthur village, Kundapura Taluk, vide Sale Deed dated 22.01.2010. Subsequently, the petitioner came to know that one Bachi Hengsu had filed Form No.7 claiming occupancy right over the land bearing Sy.No.46/3 situated at Kattebelthur village and the Tribunal granted occupancy right on 04.07.1981. Later, respondent No.3 i.e. daughter-in-law of said Bachi Hengsu had filed an application before the Land Tribunal dated 30.06.2010 for inclusion of Sy.No.167/1A measuring 1 acre 38 cents and Sy.No.167/1B measuring 1 acre 10 cents of Kattebelthur village and sought for correction in the order of the Land Tribunal to include 1 acre 87 cents in Sy.No.167/1. The said application came to be rejected. Against the same, respondent No.3 preferred writ petitions before this - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45667 WP No. 39290 of 2016 Court in W.P.Nos.27914 & 31669/2010. The said writ petitions were allowed vide order dated 05.10.2010 by directing respondent No.2 to consider the application of respondent No.3. The petitioner having come to know about the order passed by this Court in W.P.Nos.27914 & 31669/2010, for consideration of the application filed by respondent No.3, filed writ petition in W.P.No.28379/2011 to set-aside the order passed in the said W.P.Nos.27914 & 31669/2010 vide dated 05.10.2010. 3. In the said W.P.No.28379/2011, this Court vide order dated 13.04.2012, by relying the dictum laid down in the case of Seethadevi vs. Narayana Kamath and Others reported in 1987 (2) Kar.L.J 89 has held that there is no scope for considering the validity of the application filed after cut off date. As such, the order passed earlier has to be recalled and application for such relief cannot be maintainable and accordingly, reviewed and recalled the order passed in W.P.Nos.27914 & 31669/2010 dated 05.10.2010. 4. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has placed the order dated - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45667 WP No. 39290 of 2016 13.04.2012 passed in W.P.No.28379/2011 before the Land Tribunal in the proceedings in TRI.5019/5020/81-82. Despite the Tribunal has failed to consider the same and continued with the proceedings. As such, he submits that the continuation of the proceedings by the Tribunal amounts to overreaching the order of this Court. Accordingly, he prays to allow the writ petition by quashing the proceedings pending before the Land Tribunal. 5. Per contra, learned HCGP submits that though he secured the original records from the Tribunal, he is unable to find out whether any proceedings are pending before the Tribunal or not. 6. As could be gathered from records, admittedly this Court in W.P.No.28379/2011, reviewed and recalled the order passed in W.P.Nos.29714 & 31669/2010 dated 05.10.2010. As such, the liberty granted to respondent No.3 was recalled and the earlier order of the Land Tribunal dated 20.06.2010 was confirmed. In such circumstance, the Tribunal ought not to have proceeded with the case of respondent No.3 in proceedings in TRI.5019/5020/81-82. Apparently, the Tribunal - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45667 WP No. 39290 of 2016 has misread the order passed by this Court and continued the proceedings, which is liable to be quashed in view of the above order. In that view of the matter, I proceed to pass the following: i. The Writ Petition is allowed. ii. A writ of certiorari is issued. The proceedings in TRI.5019/5020/81-82 pending on the file of respondent No.2 is hereby quashed. SD/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE HKV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29