JUDGEMENT
-
(1.)Petitioner claiming to be the tenant of subject land is knocking at the doors of Writ Court for assailing the
Land Tribunal order dtd. 29/8/2011, a copy whereof
avails at Annexure-F whereby his application in Form 7
filed under Sec. 48A of the Karnataka Land Reforms
Act, 1961 has been negatived inter alia on the ground
that he has not been in the cultivation of the subject land
at all.
(2.)Learned counsel for the Petitioner seeks to falter the impugned order arguing that: there is a wealth
of material evidencing Petitioner's cultivation of the
subject land which the Tribunal has left unconsidered; he
was cultivating the land in question and his name appear
in the revenue records. Though in W.P.No.40300/2001
(KLRA), a Coordinate Judge vide order dtd. 24/7/2007
had permitted the Petitioner to adduce additional
evidence after quashment of the earlier LT order, such
an opportunity was denied by the Tribunal. So
contending, he seeks voiding of the impugned order.
(3.)Learned HCGP appearing for the State and the Tribunal, resists the Writ Petition making submission in
justification of the impugned order and the reasons on
which it has been constructed. Learned counsel
appearing for the private Respondents argues that the
order made in the earlier Writ Petition is being
misinterpreted by the Petitioner to substantiate his
ground of violation of principles of natural justice.
Petitioner or his father was never in the cultivation of the
land. Had he been, that fact would have been mentioned
in the registered sale deed dtd. 1/5/1963 under which
Petitioner's father had bought 1 Acre and 30 Guntas in
the same survey number. Even otherwise, Petitioner's
case is untrustworthy. So contending, they seek
dismissal of the Writ Petition.
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.