AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
K.L. Manjunath, J.—The legality and correctness of the order passed by the Learned Single Judge in W.P. Nos. 5082 & 5472/2009 dt. 23rd September 2010 is called in question in these appeals. The dispute in these appeals pertaining to change of khata in respect of 4 acres 21 guntas of land in Sy. No. 7 of Mattikere village, now within the territorial limits of BBMP. It is not in dispute that the land in question was an Inam land dedicated to Hanumantha Devaru temple. It is the specific case of the parties that one Ananthaiah had applied for grant of occupancy rights under the provisions of Inam Abolition Act, before the Special Deputy Commissioner and the same was granted to him on 1.2.1959. After the death of Ananthaiah, his wife and children, Venkatalakshmamma and others approached the Land Tribunal for grant of occupancy rights in respect of the very same land in question. The Land Tribunal has granted the same in their favour on 3.3.1989.
Challenging the occupancy rights granted in favour of Venkatalakshmamma and others, one M.S. Ramaiah questioned the same by filing the Writ Petition before this court in W.P. No. 39293/1992, which Writ Petition came to be allowed on 10.12.2004 and the matter was remanded to the Land Tribunal for fresh consideration. Against the order passed in the aforesaid Writ Petition, an Appeal is filed and the same is pending before this court in W.A. No. 2421/2005.
It is the specific case of respondent-4 that M.S. Ramaiah claiming occupation of the land in question as a tenant under Archak Ananthaiah, approached the Special Deputy Commissioner for regrant on 12.4.1977, which application came to be allowed in favour of M.S. Ramaiah. It is also not in dispute that aggrieved by the order of regrant by the Special Deputy Commissioner dt. 12.4.1977 in favour of M.S. Ramaiah, the widow and children of Ananthaiah filed an Appeal before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal in Appeal No. 264/2002, which Appeal came to be dismissed on 10.6.2008 by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal. It is also not in dispute that aggrieved by the order of the KAT, LRs. of Archak Ananthaiah have filed Writ Petition before this Court in W.P. No. 10104/2008 and the same is pending decision.
The actual dispute in the present case is in regard to transfer of khata by the Mahanagara Palike in the name of the 4th respondent. The Revenue Officer, BBMP by his order dt. 25.7.2005 has transferred the khata in the name of the 4th respondent--Trust. The same was questioned by the appellants herein. The Writ Petitions have been rejected and therefore, the present Appeals are filed.
We have heard the counsel for the appellants and the learned counsel appearing for the BBMP and the learned counsel for respondent No. 4.
After hearing the parties, the actual dispute is in regard to the change of transfer of khata in the name of the 4th respondent. The fact remains that the dispute is in regard to the land in question. The matter is pending consideration before the Writ Court as well as in the Writ Appeal because the LRs. of Ananthaiah, who are the appellants herein are claiming rights over the very same land. Similarly, M.S. Ramaiah, had filed an application claiming grant of occupancy rights in his favour based on an agreement entered into between him and late Ananthaiah as a tenant under him.
Therefore, we are of the view that the transfer of khata in the name of the 4th respondent would be subject to the outcome of the decision which is now pending in the parallel proceedings pending in W.As. Ultimately, if the court holds that the appellants are entitled for order of regrant or registration of occupancy rights in respect of the land in question, the khata shall be restored to the name of the appellants. Similarly, if the decision is made in favour of Late M.S. Ramaiah, then the khata has to be made in the name of the 4th respondent shall be continued. With the above observation, these Appeals are dismissed.