BHIMAPPA S/O ADIVEPPA HADAPADA, v. THE LAND TRIBUNAL,
WP/76025/2013 · 2025-10-29
Anant Ramanath Hegde
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 84790 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 84790 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14618 WP No. 76025 of 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO. 76025 OF 2013 (LR)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI. BHIMAPPA S/O ADIVEPPA HADAPADA, AGE: 75 YEARS, R/O: HOUSE NO.65, HALE TEGUR, TQ. AND DIST : DHARWAD. 2. SRI. SHANKRAYYA S/O IRAYYA SAMBAL, AGE: 57 YEARS, R/O: MADHANABHAVI, TQ. AND DIST: DHARWAD. 3. SMT. MALLAVVA W/O CHANNABASAPPA KAMBAR, AGE: 66 YEARS, R/O: HALE TEGURA, TQ. AND DIST: DHARWAD. 4. SRI. BASAPPA S/O CHANNABASAPPA KAMBAR, AGE: 30 YEARS, R/O: HALE TEGURA, TQ. AND DIST: DHARWAD. 5. SRI. MADIVALAPPA CHANNABASAPPA KAMBAR, AGE: 28 YEARS, R/O: HALE TEGUR, TQ. AND DIST: DHARWAD. 6. SMT. MAHADEVI CHANNABASAPPA KAMBAR, AGE: 25 YEARS, R/O: HALE TEGUR, TQ. AND DIST: DHARWAD. 7. NAGAPPA BASAPPA INCHALA, AGE: 60 YEARS, R/O: HALE TEGURA, TQ. AND DIST: DHARWAD. 8. BHIMAPPA VANAKKI, AGE: 58 YEARS, R/O: HALE TEGUARA, TQ. AND DIST: DHARWAD. Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH
- 2 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14618 WP No. 76025 of 2013
9. SRI. MADIVALAPPA S/O SHANKRAPPA DOMBARAKOPPA, AGE: 75 YEARS, R/O: MADANABHAVI, TQ. AND DIST: DHARWAD. 10. SRI. DASTAGIR WALIAHMAD SANADI, AGE: 43 YEARS, R/O: UCHAGANV, TQ. AND DIST : BELGAUM. … PETITIONERS (BY SRI. J.S. SHETTY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE LAND TRIBUNAL, DHARWAD, BY ITS CHAIRMAN. 2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU. 3. TAHASHILDAR, DHARWAD TALUK, DHARWAD. … RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. MALA B. BHUTE, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF WRIT TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 03/09/2012, PASSED BY THE LAND TRIBUNAL, DHARWAD, IN KLR / MADANABHAVI / DSR / 108 + 97 + 94 + 96 + 95 + 98 + 99 + 100 + 102 + 103 + 101, THE COPY OF WHICH HAS BEEN PRODUCED HEREWITH AT ANNEXURE-A, IN SO FAR AS IT RELATES TO THE LAND BEARING BLOCK NO.161 MEASURING 39 ACRES 10 GUNTAS AND BLOCK NO.189 MEASURING 189 MEASURING 4 ACRES 05 GUNTAS, SITUATED AT MADHANABHAVI VILLAGE, DHARWAD TALUK AND DISTRICT DHARWAD ORIGINALLY BELONGS TO ONE SMT. SHANTABAI, NOW BELONGING TO THE PETITIONERS AS MENTIONED IN THE SCHEDULE.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
- 3 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14618 WP No. 76025 of 2013
ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE)
This petition is filed assailing the order dated 03.09.2012 passed by the Land Tribunal, Dharwad. Impugned order is marked at Annexure-A. In terms of the said order, the Land Tribunal, Dharwad has held that property held by late Smt.Shantabai in Block No.161 measuring 39 acres 18 guntas and in Block No.189 measuring 4 acres 6 guntas of Madhanabhavi Village, Dharwad Taluk should be confiscated to the Government on the premise that the documents are not produced by the persons to show that they are successors to the property of Smt.Shantabai. 2. The petitioners have assailed the impugned order on two grounds. a) The impugned order is passed without notice to the petitioners. b) As on the date of impugned
order, Smt.Shantabai was not alive and she had already sold the property during her lifetime to the petitioners under the registered sale deed dated 10.10.1979.
- 4 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14618 WP No. 76025 of 2013
3. This Court has considered the contentions raised at the Bar and perused the records.
4. It is noticed that impugned order was passed on 03.09.2012, as on that date, Smt.Shantabhai was not alive. The Tribunal states nobody has produced the records to show that they are the legal representatives of late Smt.Shantabai and has confiscated the land in favour of the State.
5. It is stated that the registered sale deed dated 10.10.1979 referred to above would disclose the following: i. 1st petitioner purchased the property bearing Sy.No.161/4 measuring 4 acres from Smt.Shantabai. ii. Petitioner No.2 purchased the property bearing Sy.No.161/5 measuring 4 acres from Smt.Shantabai. iii. Channabasappa, the husband of petitioner No.3 and the father of petitioners No.4 to 6 purchased the property bearing Sy.Nos.161/7 and 161/2 measuring 4 acres respectively from Smt.Shantabai.
- 5 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14618 WP No. 76025 of 2013
iv. Petitioner No.7 purchased the property bearing Sy.No.161/2 measuring 4 acres from Smt.Shantabai. v. Petitioner No.8 purchased the property bearing Sy.No.161/8 measuring 4 acres from Smt.Shantabai. vi. Petitioner No.9 purchased the property bearing Sy.No.161/2 measuring 8 acres from Smt.Shantabai. vii. One Mr.Somappa Thippanna Pujar purchased the property bearing Sy.Nos.161/1, 161/P2-P2 and 161/P2-P1 measuring 3 acres 16 guntas, 3 acres 17 guntas and 4 acres 20 guntas respectively from Smt.Shantabai and later sold the same in favour of 10th petitioner.
6. Since Smt.Shantabai was not the owner of the property, when the impugned order was passed, the impugned
order is not sustainable. Moreover, since it was declared by the Tribunal that holding of Shantabai was within the ceiling limit, Shantabai was competent to alienate the property. Nobody has questioned the alienation. As such, impugned order is liable to be quashed and accordingly quashed.
- 6 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14618 WP No. 76025 of 2013
7. Hence the following:
ORDER i. Writ petition is allowed. ii. Impugned order dated 03.09.2012 marked at Annexure-A is quashed to the extent of Block No.161 measuring 39 acres 10 guntas and Block No.189 measuring 4 acre 5 guntas situated at Madhanabhavi village, Dharwad Taluk.
Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE
CLK CT:BCK LIST NO.: 2 SL NO.: 7