AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Mr.Vivek Holla, learned High Court Government Pleader, accepts notice for the respondent Nos.1 and 2. Mr.A.S.Mahesha, learned advocate, accepts notice for the respondent No.3. Therefore, formal service of notice to the respondents is dispensed with.
This is an appeal against an order passed by the Hon''ble Single Judge refusing to pass an interim order during the pendency of the writ petition.
After hearing the learned advocates appearing for the parties and as the Land Tribunal has been directed to find out as to whether the petitioner was cultivating the land as a coolie or as a tenant, we feel that status quo as regards possession is to be maintained.
We, therefore, modify the order impugned and direct the parties to maintain status quo, as of today, in relation to the property-in-dispute, during the pendency of the writ petition.
We, however, request the Hon''ble Single Judge to expedite the matter as far as possible.
The appeal stands disposed of.
In view of the disposal of the appeal, I.A.1 of 2017 does not survive for consideration and, is, also disposed of.
We make no order as to costs.