AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
M.P. Chandrakantharaj Urs, J.-Despite the tenant having obtained the occupancy rights at the hands of the Land Tribunal, Hosadurga, Chitradurga District, on appeal by the landlord, the occupancy rights granted by the Land Tribunal has been set aside.
Before the Land Tribunal, the tenant-applicant had claimed that he was cultivating the lands since 1968. But in support of his claim, he produced the lease deed executed in 1972. But the lease in his favour executed in 1972 was by the previous owner-2nd respondent who had by then parted with his title to the land in 1968 by executing a sale deed. Therefore, the Appellate Authority reasoned that the lease deed could not have been executed by a person who had lost title to the property and based on that lease deed the tenancy could not be established.
No doubt, any lease created after the coming into force of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961, contrary to Section 5 of the Act as it was at the relevant time, would be void and could not have been acted upon by the Land Tribunal.
For the reasons which the Appellate Authority has given as well as this Court, the conclusions of the Appellate Authority do not call for interference. The revision petition is rejected.
Revision Petition Rejected.