SRI. SUBARAO S/O APPAYYA ISROJI SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS vs THE LAND TRIBUNAL HUKKERI
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
532-DB
of 2026
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17
WA No. 100508 o
CNR: KAHC0201490820
026
D
IN THE HIGH
H COURT OF KARNATAKAAT DHARWAD
TH
IS THE 15 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
DATED TH
PRESENT
THE HON'B
BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
AND
THE HON'
BLE MRS JUSTICE HEMA KULKARNI
WRIT A
APPEAL NO.100508 OF 2026 (LR)
BETWEEN:
SRI. SUBARAOS/O. A
SINCE DECEASED BY
1. SHRI. TAMMANNA S/
APPAYYA ISROJI,
Y HIS LR’S.
/O. SUBARAOISROJI,
C:AGRICULTURE,
AGE: 56 YEARS, OCC
R/AT: SOLAPUR, TQ:
DIST: BELAGAVI – 59
2. SHRI. MARUTI S/O. S
HUKKARI,
91313.
SUBARAOISROJI,
C: AGRICULTURE,
AGE: 54 YEARS, OCC
R/AT: SOLAPUR, TQ:
DIST: BELAGAVI – 59
3. SMT. SHOBHA W/O.
HUKKARI,
91313.
SANJU VADAGAVI,
C.: AGRICULTURE,
AGE: 51 YEARS, OCC
R/AT: KUDCHI, TQ: H
DIST: BELAGAVI – 59
SRI. KALAPPAS/O AP
SINCE DECEASED BY
HUKKARI,
91305.
PPAYYA ISROJI
Digitally signed
by RAKESH S
HARIHAR
Location: High
Court of
Karnataka,
Dharwad Bench
Y HIS LR’S
4. SHRI. SHANKAR S/O
. KALLAPPAISROJI,
C: AGRICULTURE,
AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC
5. SHRI. DURADUNDI S
S/O. KALLAPPAISROJI,
AGE: 57 YEARS, OCC
6. ARJUN S/O. KALLAPP
C: AGRICULTURE,
PAISROJI,
AGE: 50YEARS, OCC
R1 TO R6 ARE R/AT:
DIST: BELAGAVI-591
SRI.ANNAYYA @ ANN
SINCE DECEASED BY
: AGRICULTURE,
SOLAPUR, TQ: HUKKARI,
1313.
NAPPAS/O. APPAYYA ISROJI,
Y HIS LR’S.
- 2 -
532-DB
of 2026
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17
WA No. 100508 o
CNR: KAHC0201490820
026
SMT. GOURAVVA
SINCE DECEASED
7. SMT. PARVATI W/O.
W/O. ANNAYYA @ ANNAPPAISROJI,
D BY HER LR’S.
ASHOK MUKKANNAVAR,
C: AGRICULTURE,
AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC
R/AT: SOLAPUR, TQ:
DIST: BELAGAVI – 59
SMT. AKKAVVAW/O.
SINCE DECEASED BY
8. SMT. GANGAVVA W/O
HUKKARI,
91313.
BABU NAGARALE,
Y HER LR’S.
O. SHIVAJI NAGARALE,
C.: AGRICULTURE,
AGE: 56 YEARS, OCC
9. SMT. REKHA W/O. VA
AJEEDMAJAGAVI,
C: AGRICULTURE,
AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC
10.SMT. KASTURI W/O.
ESHWAR BHAVE,
C: AGRICULTURE,
AGE: 56 YEARS, OCC
11.SHRI. TANAJI S/O BA
ABU NAGARALE,
C: AGRICULTURE,
AGE: ... YEARS, OCC
12.SMT. AKKAVVA W/O.
SAMBHAJINAGARALE,
C: AGRICULTURE,
AGE: 47 YEARS, OCC
13.SMT. NANDA W/O. N
ETAJI NAGARALE,
C: AGRICULTURE,
AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC
14.SHRI. PRAVEEN S/O.
NETAJI NAGARALE,
C: AGRICULTURE,
AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC
15.SHRI. PRASAD S/O. N
NETAJI NAGARALE,
C: AGRICULTURE,
AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC
R8 TO R15 ARE R/AT
TQ: HUKKARI, DIST:
T: SOLAPUR,
BELAGAVI – 591313
.
…APPE
AY TATA BANGI,ADVOCATE)
ELLANTS
(BY SRI. MRUTYUNJA
AND:
1. THE LAND TRIBUN
NAL HUKKERI,
TAL: HUKKERI, DI
REPRESENTED BY
IST: BELAGAVI,
Y ITS SECRETARY/ THE TAHASILDAR.
- 3 -
532-DB
of 2026
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17
WA No. 100508 o
CNR: KAHC0201490820
026
2. SHRI. VENKATESH
H S/O. ANANT KULKARANI,
OCC: AGRICULTURE,
AGE: 59 YEARS, O
R/O: SOLLAPUR, T
DIST: BELAGAVI –
SRI.BALAPPAS/O. SH
SINCE DECEASED BY
TQ: HUKKERI,
– 591313.
HIVAPPANAGARALE,
Y HIS LR’S
SRI.APPASAHEBS/
SINCE DECEASED
3. SMT. LAXMIBAI W
/O. SHIVAPPANAGARALE,
D BY HIS LR’S.
W/O. APPASAHEBNAGARALE,
AGE: 73 YEARS, O
R/O: SOLAPUR, T
DIST: BELAGAVI –
4. SHRI. JYOTEPPA S
OCC: AGRICULTURE &HOUSEHOLD WORK
K,
Q: HUKKERI,
– 591313.
S/O. APPASAHEBNAGARALE,
OCC: AGRICULTURE,
AGE: 54 YEARS, O
R/O: SOLAPUR, T
DIST: BELAGAVI –
5. SMT. ANITA W/O.
Q: HUKKERI,
– 591313.
SHIVAJI PUTHANE,
OCC: AGRICULTURE &HOUSEHOLD,
AGE: 47 YEARS, O
R/O: KANAGALA,
DIST: BELAGAVI –
6. SMT. VANDANA W
TQ: HUKKERI,
– 591225.
W/O. NAVANTHHINGLAJE,
AGE: 40 YEARS, O
R/O: APPACHIWA
DIST: BELAGAVI –
OCC: AGRICULTURE &HOUSEHOLD,
DI, TQ: NIPPANI,
– 591241.
…RESPON
. BILKI, GA FOR R1;SRI. SHIVARAJ S. B
TO R6;NOTICE TO R2 DISPENSED WITH)
NDENTS
BALLOLI,
(BY SRI. RAKESH M.
ADVOCATE FOR R3 T
THIS WRIT A
COURT ACT, 1961,
02.12.2025 PASSED
108827 OF 2025 AND
WRIT PETITION IN T
THIS WRIT A
JUDGMENT WAS DEL
APPEAL IS FILED U/S.4 OF KARNATAKA
A HIGH
PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER
BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN W
D GRANT AN INTERIM ORDER AS PRAYED
DATED
W.P.NO.
D IN THE
HE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THI
IS DAY,
LIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANN
NA
AND
HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE HEMA KULKARN
NI
- 4 -
532-DB
of 2026
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17
WA No. 100508 o
CNR: KAHC0201490820
026
ORAL JUDGMENT
BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA )
(PER: HON'B
s of the
The appellant
ts, who are the legal representatives
25, are
original petitioners
s in Writ Petition No.108827 of 202
12.2025
before this Court ca
alling in question an order dated 02.1
petition,
passed by the lear
rned Single Judge in the said writ p
ng the
whereby the learn
ned Single Judge, instead of stayi
he Land
operation of the o
rder dated 09.10.2025 passed by th
sh the
Tribunal, Hukkeri,
directs the respondents to furni
s every
accounts relating to
o the 2/3rd extent of the petition land
year before 31st Ma
arch.
2. Facts, a
adumbrated, are as follows:
to be
The appellan
nts’ predecessors in interest claim
o.480/1
cultivating tenants
s of the lands bearing R.S. No
cres 09
measuring 1 acre
and R.S. No.482 measuring 5 ac
k (‘the
guntas, situated
in Solapur Village, Hukkeri Taluk
e Form
schedule properties
s’ for short). On 28.07.1974, they fil
ment of
No.7 before the La
and Tribunal, Hukkeri seeking conferm
chedule
occupancy rights,
claiming 2/3rd share in the sc
ntesting
properties. A rival
claimant, the predecessor of the con
- 5 -
532-DB
of 2026
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17
WA No. 100508 o
CNR: KAHC0201490820
026
respondents, also f
files Form No.7, claiming to be cultivat
ting the
lands for the past 3
32 years and to have 1/3rd share. Th
he Land
Tribunal passes an
n order on 06.05.1977, which is ca
alled in
question by the riv
al claimant in Writ Petition No.5524 o
f 1977.
This Court, by ord
er dated 06.10.1982, quashes the o
order of
the Land Tribuna
al and remands the matter for
r fresh
consideration, on
the ground that adequate opportuni
ity was
not afforded to the
e claimants to tender their statemen
nts and
evidence. In the re
emanded proceedings, the parties le
ad oral
and documentary
evidence and the appellants f
file an
application seeking
g spot inspection. The Land Tribunal,
, by its
order dated 09.10.
2025, rejects the claim of the appellan
nts and
grants occupancy
y rights in favour of the con
ntesting
respondents. The
e appellants then prefer Writ
Petition
No.108827 of 2025
5, in which the learned Single Judge
passes
the order dated 02
.12.2025, which has driven the appell
lants to
this Court in the su
bject appeal.
3. Heard S
Sri. Mrutyunjay Tata Bangi, learned co
ounsel
appearing for the
e appellants, Sri. Rakesh M. Bilki,
learned
Government Advo
cate appearing for respondent No.1 a
and Sri.
- 6 -
532-DB
of 2026
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17
WA No. 100508 o
CNR: KAHC0201490820
026
Shivaraj S. Balloll
i, learned counsel appearing for resp
pondent
Nos.3 to 6 and p
perused the material on record. No
otice to
respondent No.2 is
s dispensed with.
4. The ap
ppeal is directed against the interim
m order
passed by the l
learned Single Judge on 02.12.202
25. The
appellants herein
n were the petitioners before the
learned
Single Judge, who
o passed the following order:
1. Heard
petitione
respond
2. This pe
09.10.20
3. In terms
has gra
contestin
they are
lands a
possessi
4. Learned
contend
inspectio
which ha
further s
evidence
petitione
consider
5. Learned
respond
names o
thereafte
have ap
the learned counsel appearing for
er and learned counsel appearing
ents No.8 to 15.
the
for
etition is filed assailing the order da
ated
025 passed by the Land Tribunal.
s of the impugned order, the Land Tribu
anted occupancy rights in favour of
unal
the
that
ng respondents. The petitioners’ claim t
e in possession of 2/3rd extent of the petit
tion
and the contesting respondents are
in
ion of 1/3rd extent.
counsel appearing for the petitioners wo
ould
spot
that the petitioners’ application for s
on is not considered by the Land Tribu
nal,
his
tary
as resulted in miscarriage of justice. It is
submission that other oral and document
e would establish the possession of
ers over the 2/3rd extent and that is also
red in proper perspective.
the
not
counsel appearing for the contest
ents would submit that since 1951,
of the contesting respondents' ancestors
ting
the
and
ents
er, the names of the contesting responde
peared in the property records and there
are
- 7 -
532-DB
of 2026
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17
WA No. 100508 o
CNR: KAHC0201490820
026
no reco
ancestor
immedia
6. The Cou
the Bar
7. Prima-fa
the cont
entry in
again r
contestin
appears
stateme
contestin
tenants.
8. Learned
that one
respond
petitione
of the s
mutated
respond
they are
propertie
9. At this
merits o
is of the
of the im
directed
extent o
31st Ma
10. The pet
applicati
noticed t
against
accounts
on the p
5. The com
ords to show that the petitioners or t
heir
ants
rs were cultivating the property as tena
ately before 01.03.1974.
urt has considered the contentions raised
d at
and perused the records.
acie the records would stand in the name
e of
testing respondents and there is an mutat
tion
hich
the record of right in the year 1951, wh
reveals the name of the ancestors
of
d it
n a
ng respondents as protected tenants an
that the Landlord has also given
nt in the year 1966 to the effect that
ng respondents’ predecessors are
the
the
counsel for the petitioners would sub
e Kashavva is married to the family of
bmit
the
the
tage
o be
ents and Kashavva is none other than
ers’ ancestor's sister and taking advant
ituation that the property was allowed to
d in the name of Kashavva's husband,
the
ugh
tion
ents are asserting exclusive right tho
e not in exclusive possession of the petit
es.
stage, without expressing anything on
of the claim of either of the parties, the Co
the
ourt
e view that instead of staying the operat
tion
d be
mpugned order, the respondents should
to furnish the accounts relating to the 2/
of the petition properties every year bef
/3rd
fore
rch.
titioners are also permitted to move
ion for early hearing of the petition as i
an
it is
filed
that cases and counter cases have been f
both parties. Direction to furnish
s, shall not be construed as having reflec
possession of either of the parties.
the
cted
mpeting claims of the parties with reg
gard to
their respective s
shares have driven the appellants to
o prefer
- 8 -
532-DB
of 2026
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17
WA No. 100508 o
CNR: KAHC0201490820
026
the subject writ a
ppeal. In the light of the fact that the
appeal
is directed against
t an interim order, we deem it approp
riate to
dispose of the a
ppeal by directing the parties to m
maintain
status quo qua
their respective shares, as prima
a facie
indicated in the
interim order passed by the learned
Single
Judge. The afores
said arrangement shall, however, be
subject
to the final outcom
me of the writ petition.
6. The app
pellants and the respondents are at lib
berty to
urge all contentio
ns before the learned Single Judge.
7. It is ne
eedless to observe that the learned
Single
Judge has alrea
ady permitted the petitioners to
file an
application seeki
ing early hearing of the writ petition
n. With
the aforesaid ob
servations, the writ appeal stands d
isposed
of.
Sd/-
(M.NAGAPRASANNA)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(HEMA KULKARNI)
JUDGE
RSH/CT: ASC
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 51