AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
B.V. Nagarathna, J.—Land bearing Sy. No. 49 measuring 2.07 acres and Sy. No. 50 measuring 1.39 acres, situated at Kakkihalli village, Kuknoor Post, Yelburga Taluk, Koppal District are said to be the ancestral properties of the petitioners. By a Settlement Deed executed in the year 1992, petitioner No. 1 is said to have transferred his entire rights in the aforesaid lands in favour of petitioner No. 2, who is none other than his son. On 13.08.1998, petitioner No. 1 is said to have consented in favour of respondent No. 3 to obtain quarrying lease from the Department of Mines and Geology the respondent No. 2 herein. On 19.08.1998, respondent No. 3 had made an application seeking grant of quarrying lease over an area of 2 acres of land in Sy. Nos. 49 and 50 of Kakkihalli village. It is stated that on 14.09.1998, petitioner No. 1 on his own behalf and on behalf of his minor son had executed a General Power of Attorney appointing respondent No. 3 as their Power of Attorney Holder. An application was made by respondent No. 3 for the purpose of extraction of Himalayan Blue Granite in Sy. Nos. 49 and 50. On 04.02.2004, respondent No. 2 had executed QL No. 656 in favour of respondent No. 3 in respect of 2 acres of land as aforesaid for a period of 10 years. Subsequently, there arose certain disputes between the petitioners and respondent No. 3. Therefore, the petitioners have approached this Court in this Writ Petition by seeking a direction to respondent No. 2 to transfer QL No. 656 dated 04.02.2004 (Annexure-F) to the name of petitioner No. 2 after collecting all the dues. An alternative prayer is also sought by the petitioners to direct respondent No. 2 to cancel QL No. 656 standing in the name of respondent No. 3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties at considerable length and on various dates.
Learned Additional Government Advocate has drawn our attention to the documents at Annexures-S to S3 annexed to the Writ Petition and has stated that despite several notices being issued to respondent No. 3 with regard to payment of royalty and also dead rent, the same have not been responded to by respondent No. 3 and neither have the dues been paid. Under the circumstances, he submits that appropriate action would be initiated as against respondent No. 3.
Today, learned counsel for respondent No. 3, by filing his statement of objections has also handed over two Demand Drafts, one for Rs. 50,000/- and the other for Rs. 1,00,000/- to the learned Additional Government Advocate with regard to part payment of the outstanding dues. However, learned Additional Government submits that keeping in mind the fact that dues have not been completely paid, suitable action would be initiated as against respondent No. 3. The statement of learned Additional Government Advocate is placed on record. In view of the statement made by the learned Additional Government Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioners states that she would not press the petition at this stage. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. While disposing of the Writ Petition, we also record that the inter se disputes between the petitioners and respondent No. 3 could be resolved before an appropriate forum and liberty is reserved to both of them to initiate appropriate action in accordance with law.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that a sum of Rs. 3,30,643/- has been deposited before this Court and that she may be permitted to withdraw the said amount on behalf of the petitioners.
The Registry is permitted to refund the said amount to petitioner No. 1, after due verification.