Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 31721 (KAR)

SMT TOLLAKI BHAI v. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

WP/10140/2026 · 2026-07-06

M I Arun

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33643 WP No. 10140 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 10140 OF 2026 (SC/ST) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. TOLLAKI BHAI W/O.BHIMA NAIK, AGED ABOUT 88 YEARS, 2. SRI. RAVI NAIK.B, SON OF BHIMA NAIK AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS 3. SMT. LALITHA BHAI D/O.BHIMA NAIK AGED 60 YEARS 4. SRI. KUMARA NAIK SON OF BHIMA NAIK AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS 5. SMT. RENUKA BHAI D/O.BHIMA NAIK AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS 6. SMT. DEVI BHAI D/O.BHIMA NAIK AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS 7. SRI.CHANDRA NAIK SON OF BHIMA NAIK AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33643 WP No. 10140 of 2026 ALL ARE RESIDING AT HANUMASAGARA THANDA HONNALI TALUK, DAVANEGERE DISTRICT - 577 217 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SANDESH KUMAR M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DAVANAGERE DISTRICT DAVANAGERE - 577 217 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, DAVANAGERE SUB-DIVISION DAVANAGERE - 577 217 3. SRI. MAHESHWARAPPA SON OF SIDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS 4. SRI. NAGARAJAPPA SON OF SIDDAPPA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS 5. SRI. BASAVARAJAPPA SON OF SIDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS 6. SRI. DANANJAYAPPA SON OF SIDDAPPA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS 7. SRI. MAHESHSWATHAPPA SON OF SIDDAPPA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33643 WP No. 10140 of 2026 8. SRI. HALANAIK SON OF BILYA NAIK AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS 9. SRI.MALLAPPA SON OF CHENNAPPA AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS 10. SRI. HANUMAPPA SON OF SIDDAPPA AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS 11. SRI. RANGAPPA SON OF SIDDAPPA AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS 12. SMT.KAMALAMMA WIFE OF MALLAPPA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS ALL ARE RESIDING AT BALAMURI VILLAGE HONNAHALLI TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT - 577 217 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. ANITHA N., AGA FOR R1 AND R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTUION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 15.07.2013 PASSED IN PTCL/CR- 11/2010-11 BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT AND ORDER DATED 23.02.1989 PASSED BY SECOND RESPONDENT IN PTCL/CR- 32/1984-85 VIDE ANNEXURE- B AND A AND ETC., - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33643 WP No. 10140 of 2026 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING / PHYSICAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN ORAL ORDER The forefather of the petitioners is said to have been granted the property, which is the subject matter of the writ petition in the year 1964. The same was alienated. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners challenged the same before the Assistant Commissioner and thereafter, before the Deputy Commissioner. The claim of the petitioners has been rejected. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed. The impugned orders are dated 23.02.1989 and 15.07.2013. The writ petition is filed in the year 2026. The inordinate delay of 13 years is not satisfactorily explained by the petitioners. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33643 WP No. 10140 of 2026 2. For the aforementioned reasons, the Writ Petition is hereby dismissed, on the ground of delay and laches. Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE CH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1