- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010225712023 NC: 2026:KHC:53232 WP No. 9428 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO. 9428 OF 2023 (LR) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. K U ABDUL RAZAK AGED 50 YEARS, S/O UMARABBA NO.3/138, ADAKERE PADPU KONAJE VILLAGE AND POST MANGALORE TQ., D K-574199 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ARUN KUMAR R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE M S BUILDING BENGALURU-560001 REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE LAND TRIBUNAL MANGALORE TALUK MANGALORE D K - 574199 REP BY ITS CHAIRMAN. 3. MR UBAIDULLA, 59 YEARS, S/O LATE POKARE BEARY ADKARE PADPU KONAJE VILLAGE AND POST, MANGALORE TQ., D.K.-574199. Digitally signed by CHAYA S A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010225712023 NC: 2026:KHC:53232 WP No. 9428 of 2023 4. CHURCH OF SOUTH INDIA TRUST ASSOCIATION (R) REPRESENTED BY ITS BISHOP SOUTHERN DIOCESE DIOCESE OFFICE, BALMATTA MANGALURU-575002. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.SHARADA H V., AGA FOR R1 AND 2, SRI DEEPAK WAGLE, ADVOCATE FOR R3, SRI PUNDIKAI ISHWARA BHAT, ADVOCATE, FOR R4 R4 SD. BUT UNREPRESENTED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DTD 19/8/1981 PASSED BY THE 8TH LAND TRIBUNAL, MANGALORE IN LRT NO 4092/1977-78 IN SO FAR AS THE GRANT OF OCCUPANCY RIGHT IN RESPECT OF SY NO 14/3B MEASURING O.13 ACRE OF LAND SITUATED IN KONAJE VILLAGE OF MANGALORE TALUK, DK (ANNEXURE A). THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN `B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER In this writ petition, petitioner is assailing the order dated 19.08.1981 passed in LRT No.4092/1977-78 by the respondent No.2 (Annexure-A). - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010225712023 NC: 2026:KHC:53232 WP No. 9428 of 2023 2. In this regard, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.3 and the learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondent - State submitted that, there is no acceptable reasons as to challenge the impugned order passed by the Land Tribunal after a period of forty one years. 3. In this regard, I have carefully considered the averments made in the petition, and taking into consideration the fact that, the impugned order has been challenged by the petitioner after a period of forty one years, and further no acceptable reasons have been stated as to condone the delay of forty one years in filing the writ petition. 4. I am of the view that, following the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mrinmoy Maity vs Chhanda Koley and Others reported in (2024) 15 SCC 215, the writ petition requires to be dismissed on the ground of delay and laches - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010225712023 NC: 2026:KHC:53232 WP No. 9428 of 2023 The writ petition is dismissed on the ground of delay and laches. SD/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE BKM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 41