High CourtsDIVISION BENCH(2017) 06 KAR CK 0086

MUNIYAPPA SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS. SRI B R RAMESH S/O B RANGAIAH SHETTY vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT, & ORS.

Karnataka High Court · Decided on 13 June 2017

HON’BLE JUDGES
Subhro Kamal Mukherjee, P.S.Dinesh Kumar
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
862 of 2015 (SCST)

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

8 paragraphs · 249 words
1.

This is an appeal against the judgment and order dated February 2, 2015, passed by the Hon''ble Single Judge, dismissing a writ petition.

2.

One Muniyappa claims to be the grantee of the disputed land. Muniyappa sold the land to S.M.Nagaraju. S.M.Nagaraju sold the land to B.Ramesh and from B.Ramesh, the writ petitioner -respondent No.4 purchased the land.

3.

Muniyappa applied for resumption of the land invoking the provisions of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 (''the said Act'' for short). Muniyappa is now dead. His estate is represented by his heir and legal representatives. Muniyappa contended that the sale by him to S.M.Nagaraju was non-est as no permission from the Government was obtained and is, also, hit by Section 3(1)(b) of the said Act.

4.

Questions cropped up as to whether Muniyappa has been a member of the scheduled caste community and whether the land was sold after the lock-in period.

5.

The Hon''ble Single Judge recorded a finding of fact that Muniyappa was a Christian and, therefore, he is not a member of the scheduled caste community. Moreover, there is a specific finding that the land was alienated after the lock-in period.

6.

Therefore, there is no merit in the writ appeal. The writ appeal stands dismissed.

7.

In view of the dismissal of the writ appeal, I.A.No.I of 2016 does not survive for consideration and is, also, dismissed.

8.

We make no order as to costs.