Sri K. Jayaramaiah vs The Secretary and The Tahasiladar Taluk Executive Magistrate

A.S. Bopanna, J.—The petitioner is before this Court seeking for issue of mandamus to direct the second respondent to consider the representation dated 16.02.2012 as at Annexure-E. The petitioner contends that he has three brothers and all of them are residents of Maragowdanahalli Village. The earlier proceedings which had been initiated u/s 145 of Cr.P.C. in C. Misc. No. 58/2011-12, when the petitioner and his brothers had certain disputes is also referred to in the petition. In the said proceedings, the parties are stated to have entered into a compromise which has been recorded by respondent No. 2 wherein the nature of payments to be made relating to the sugarcane being given for crushing in the factory is agreed to. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite such agreement between him and his brothers, they have not adhered to the same. Therefore, prejudice has been caused to the petitioner.

Reference is also made to the document at Annexure-D which was the objection statement filed by petitioner''s brothers in C. Misc. 125/2010-11 wherein the petitioner''s brothers are also stated to have admitted with regard to payment of the transportation charges. It is in that circumstance, the petitioner had filed the representation at Annexure-E to the petition. Since the same has not been considered in accordance with law, the petitioner is before this Court.

Learned Government Advocate would point out that respondent No. 2 by his order at Annexure-F has already taken a decision that the petitioner and his brothers would have to get the issue resolved in a Civil Court and therefore, the consideration of Annexure-E would not arise.

Notwithstanding the order at Annexure-F, what is necessary to be noticed is that at an earlier instance when there was proceedings between the parties, certain understanding has been reached and in that circumstance, the petitioner is seeking implementation of the same. In that view, it is necessary for respondent No. 2 to notify the brothers of the petitioner to take into consideration their views, more particularly in a circumstance when the petitioner contend that while filing their objection statement in the earlier proceedings, they had admitted with regard to payment of the amount. On the brothers of the petitioner appearing before respondent No. 2, if the respondent No. 2 finds that there is any serious dispute with regard to properties or the manner of sharing the usufructs thereto and the payments to be made etc., certainly respondent No. 2 would thereafter relegate the parties to the Civil Court.

On the other hand, if the brothers of the petitioner agree to adhere to the same, it would be open for respondent No. 2 to see that the earlier undertaking is complied by the brothers. Hence, to consider all these aspects, necessarily respondent No. 2 would have to issue notice to the brothers of the petitioner and to the petitioner and thereafter decide the matter in accordance with law. Hence, a direction is issued to respondent No. 2 to that effect. In order to enable expeditious consideration, the petitioner shall now file a copy of the representation at Annexure-E and all supporting documents along with a copy of this order with respondent No. 2 within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Respondent No. 2 shall thereafter notify the parties and dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible.

The petition stands disposed of accordingly.