- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18650 WP No. 21847 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO.21847 OF 2017 (LR) BETWEEN: HANUMANTHAGOUDA RUDRAGOUDA PATIL SINCE DEAD, REPRESENTED BY HIS LRS., 1. SMT. KAMALAVVA, W/O. HANUMANTHAGOUDA RUDRAGOUDA PATIL, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, RESIDING AT KOTTIGERI ONEE, BANKAPURA VILLAGE, SHIGGAON TALUK, HAVERI DISTRICT-581 205. SINCE DECEASED BY HER LRS PETITIONER NO.3 TO PETITIONER NO.7. 2. SMT. SAVITHRI, W/O. LATE GANGANAGOUDA HANUMANTHAGOUDA PATIL, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, RESIDING AT KOTTIGERI ONEE, BANKAPURA VILLAGE, SHIGGAON TALUK, HAVERI DISTRICT-581 205. 3. SRI. ARJUNGOUDA GANGANAGOUDA PATIL S/O. LATE GANGANAGOUDA HANUMANTHAGOUDA PATIL, AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS, RESIDING AT KOTTIGERI ONEE, BANKAPURA VILLAGE, SHIGGAON TALUK, HAVERI DISTRICT-581 205. Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18650 WP No. 21847 of 2017 4. SRI. MALLANAGOUDA HANUMANTHAGOUDA PATIL S/O. LATE HANUMANTHAGOUDA RUDRAGOUDA PATIL, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, RESIDING AT KOTTIGERI ONEE, BANKAPURA VILLAGE, SHIGGAON TALUK, HAVERI DISTRICT-581 205. RAMANAGOUDA HANUMANTHAGOUDA PATIL (DEAD) 5. SRI. SANGANAGOUDA HANUMANTHAGOUDA PATIL, S/O. LATE HANUMANTHAGOUDA RUDRAGOUDA PATIL, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, RESIDING AT KOTTIGERI ONEE, BANKAPURA VILLAGE, SHIGGAON TALUK, HAVERI DISTRICT-581 205. 6. SMT. CHANNAVVA W/O. GURUPADAPPA KUDALA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, RESIDING AT CHANDAPUR VILLAGE, SHIGGAON TALUK, HAVERI DISTRICT-581 205. 7. SMT. PARAVVA @ HEMAVATHI W/O. SIDDAPPA THIRAKKAPPA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, RESIDING AT MATTURU VILLAGE, BADAGI, SHIGGAON TALUK, HAVERI DISTRICT-581 205. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. B S KAMATE,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18650 WP No. 21847 of 2017 M.S. BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDI, BENGALURU-560 001. 2. THE LAND TRIBUNAL BY ITS CHAIRMAN, SHIGGAON TALUK, HAVERI DISTRICT-581 193. 3. THE TAHSILDAR SHIGGAON TALUK, HAVERI DISTRICT-581 193. 4. SRI. VEERABHADRAGOUDA PAKKIRAGOUDA PATIL S/O. LATE PAKKIRAGOUDA PATIL, SINCE DEAD, REPRESENTED BY HIS LRS. 4(A) GURUPADAVVA VEERABHADRAGOUDA PATIL, AGE. 50, OCC. HOUSEHOLD, R/O. BANKAPUR, TQ. SHIGGAON, DIST. HAVERI. 4(B) PUSHIPA W/O. BASAVARAJ SAVANUR, AGE. 32, OCC. HOUSEHOLD, R/O. AT-POST. YALLUR, TQ. HANGAL, DIST. HAVERI. 4(C) MANJULA PATIL W/O. H.BASAVARAJ AGE. 30 OCC. HOUSEHOLD, R/O. AT-POST. BANNIGOL, TQ. HAGARIBOMANAHALLI, DIST. VIJAYANAGAR. 4(D) SHARANABASAVAGOUDA VEERABHADRAGOUDA PATIL, AGE. 25, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. BANKAPUR, TQ. SHIGGAON, DIST. HAVERI. 4(E) SHIDDIVINAYAKAGOUDA VEERABHADRAGOUDA PATIL, AGE. 20, OCC. AGRICULTURE, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18650 WP No. 21847 of 2017 R/O. BANKAPUR, TQ. SHIGGAON, DIST. HAVERI. 4(F) KUMARI BHUMIKA D/O. VEERABHADRAGOUDA PATIL AGE. 18 OCC. AGRICULTURE R/O. BANKAPUR, TQ. SHIGGAON, DIST. HAVERI. 5. SRI. JAYAVANTHAGOUDA PAKKIRAGOUDA PATIL S/O. LATE PAKKIRAGOUDA PATIL, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, RESIDING AT BANKAPURA VILLAGE, SHIGGAON TALUK, HAVERI DISTRICT-581 205. 6. SMT. SHANTHAVVA W/O. BASAVANNAPPA BENNE, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, RESIDING AT SURASHETTIKOPPA VILLAGE, KALAGHATGI TALUK, DHARWAD DISTRICT-580 114. AMENDED CAUSE TITLE AS PER COURT ORDER DATED 17/03/2025. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRAVEEN K. UPPAR, AGA FOR R1-R3; SRI. CHANDRASHEKHAR R. HIREMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R4(A-F) & R5 & R6) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR ORDER QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 5TH OF APRIL 2017, PASSED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT/LAND TRIBUNAL IN NO.L.R.T.M.S.R:KOTTIGERI-07/SHIGGON VIDE ANNEXURE-G, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR DICTATING JUDGMENT, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18650 WP No. 21847 of 2017 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents. 2. This petition is filed assailing the order dated 05.04.2017 passed by the Land Tribunal, Shiggaon rejecting petitioners’ applications seeking occupancy rights. The petitioners sought occupancy rights in respect of property bearing Survey No.390/2 of Bankapura village, Taluk Shiggaon. The total extent of land is for 4 acres 31 guntas. 3. The petitioners claim that one Hanumantagowda was the tenant in respect of entire property and his claim relating to tenancy and lawful cultivation immediately before 1974 is very much established and the Tribunal has rejected without noticing the order in the earlier proceedings and also the order passed in the proceedings relating to surrender of tenancy. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18650 WP No. 21847 of 2017 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would refer to the judgment of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P. No.51128/2003 in terms of the order dated 03.02.2005 the writ petition is allowed and matter is remitted to the Tribunal for fresh consideration in accordance with law. 5. Learned Counsel would also refer to the observation made in paragraphs No.3 to 6 and also the paragraph No.9 and urged that the remand is a open remand where the Tribunal was required to consider the claim of the petitioner on the basis of the evidence led before the Tribunal. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners would also urge that the tenancy is very much established given the fact that the landlord has filed an application for surrender of tenancy and despite the order of surrender, the tenant did not hand over the possession. And, tenant continued to be in possession of property and this aspect has not been noticed by the Tribunal and erroneously rejected the application for grant of occupancy. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18650 WP No. 21847 of 2017 7. Learned counsel for the respondent landlord would urge that the tenant surrendered the entire property though order for surrender was only half of the property. Tenant moved an application to surrender the entire property and later he did not continue to be in possession of the property and noticing the fact that the tenant is not cultivating the property immediately before 01.03.1974, the Tribunal has rejected the application seeking occupancy rights. 8. The Court has considered the contentions raised at the Bar and perused the records. 9. As can be noticed from the order dated 03.02.2005 in W.P. No.51128/2003 the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has noticed that suit was filed in SLC Suit No.58/1972 before the Additional Munsiff, Savanur and on 09.06.1972. The said suit was allowed and petitioner in the said suit namely the tenant was permitted to surrender 2 acres 15 ½ guntas of land out of 4 acres 31 guntas in survey No.115/2 referred to - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18650 WP No. 21847 of 2017 above and the landlord was permitted to enter into the possession of the said land. 10. It is also required to be noticed that the landlord had also filed an application for resumption of entire land bearing survey No.115/2 in SLC No.58/1972 and that suit was dismissed as not pressed in terms of order dated 12.06.1972 and relevant portion of the order reads as under:- i. “Sy.No.115/2 was cultivated by opponent No.2 and he has surrendered the land under S.L.C. No.58/1972. Hence, she has given up claim against him”. 11. It is also noticed from paragraph No.6 of the observations made by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the aforementioned order, that tenant who had filed aforementioned writ petition had contended that since the petitioner had surrendered 50% of the land, the Tribunal ought to have held tenant has continued in respect of the remaining half portion. Though the paragraph No.9 of the order would indicate that the entire order is set-aside and remanded for fresh consideration, the Court is of the view that tenant has - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18650 WP No. 21847 of 2017 surrendered 50% of the land and landlord has accepted only 50% of the land. 12. The resumption application by the landlord is dismissed as not pressed. Though learned counsel for the petitioner would urge that despite the surrender, the tenant has continued to be in possession of the property. The Court does not find any material to hold that the tenant has continued in possession of the property despite surrender. The surrender order itself would indicate that the landlord is entitled to enter upon the 50% of the land and based on that the landlord has not pressed his application seeking surrender of entire land. 13. Under these circumstances, the Court is of the view that 50% of the land is in possession of the tenant and remaining 50% is in possession of the landlord. 14. However, it is required to be noticed that under the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 it is the duty of the Tribunal to demarcate the portion of the property which - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18650 WP No. 21847 of 2017 is in cultivation when the occupancy right is granted in respect of a portion of the property. Under these circumstances, the Tribunal has to carryout the exercise as to in which portion of the property the petitioners are in occupation and in which portion the landlord is in occupation. For this limited purpose, the matter is remanded to the Tribunal. Parties are directed to lead evidence before the Tribunal relating to the possession over the respective 50% of portion of the land. Hence, the following: ORDER (i) Petition is allowed-in-part. (ii) The impugned order dated 05.04.2017 passed by the Land Tribunal, Shiggaon is set-aside. (iii) The matter is remitted to the Tribunal. (iv) The parties are permitted to lead evidence relating to possession of respective 50% of the land. - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18650 WP No. 21847 of 2017 (v) The Tribunal shall consider as to which portion is acquired by the petitioners and the contesting respondents and thereafter, the Tribunal has to grant occupancy rights to the petitioners in respect of 50% of the land, the Tribunal should also indicate the boundaries and shall also grant occupancy to the petitioners and thereafter, Tribunal has to issue the form No.10 (vi) Exercise shall be completed within four months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE CHS CT-MCK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 96