SRI.S.R.MADHAVA GOWADA vs THE LAND TRIBUNAL
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56725
WP No. 16326 of 2015
CNR: KAHC010497112015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 9 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
WRIT PETITION NO. 16326 OF 2015 (LR)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI.S.R.MADHAVA GOWADA
S/O RAMAPPA GOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,
R/AT SULYAKODI HOUSE,
UBARADKA-MITHOOR VILLAGE,
SULLIA TALUK,
D.K.DISTRICT-574 239.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. G BALAKRISHNA SHASTRY.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE LAND TRIBUNAL
SULIA TALUK, SULLIA DISTRICT,
REP. BY CHAIRMAN-574239.
2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP. BY ITS SECRETARY TO
REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
M.S.BUILDING, DR.AMBEDKAR ROAD,
BANGALORE-560 001.
3.
SMT.DEVAMMA
W/O HUKRAPPA GOWDA,
MAJOR.
Digitally signed by
CHAYA S A
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56725
WP No. 16326 of 2015
CNR: KAHC010497112015
4. CHANDRASHEKARA GOWDA
S/O HUKRAPPA GOWDA,
MAJOR.
5. NEELAMMA
D/O HUKRAPPA GOWDA,
MAJOR.
6. ELYANNA GOWDA
S/O HUKRAPPA GOWDA,
MAJOR.
7. GANGAMMA
D/O HUKRAPPA GOWDA,
MAJOR.
8. SREEDHARA
S/O HUKRAPPA GOWDA,
MAJOR.
9. NETRAVATHI
D/O HUKRAPPA GOWDA,
MAJOR.
10.
DAMAYANTHI
D/O HUKRAPPA GOWDA,
MAJOR.
11.
MEDAPPA
S/O HUKRAPPA GOWDA,
MAJOR.
SL.NO.3 TO 11 ARE RESIDENT OF
PANATHILA HOUSE,
UBARADKA MITHOOR VILLAGE & POST,
SULLIA TALUK-574 239 D.K.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT.SHARADA H V, AGA, FOR R1 AND 2,
SRI VENUGOPAL M S, ADVOCATE FOR R3 TO R11)
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56725
WP No. 16326 of 2015
CNR: KAHC010497112015
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TOQUASH
THE ORDER OF THE LAND TRIBUNAL SULLIA IN CASE
NO.LRY/420/74-75 DTD14.12.2012 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-
A.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN `B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS
UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
ORAL ORDER
In this writ petition, petitioner is assailing the order
dated 14.12.2012 (Annexure-A) passed by the respondent
No.1-Land Tribunal, Sullia, conferring occupancy right in
favour of the legal representatives of Hukrappa Gowda.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that, originally
the land bearing Sy. No.127/2A measuring 3.00 acres in
Ubaradka-Mithoor Village was belonged to Srinivasa
Bipadithaya and the same was purchased by Raghava
Gowda, elder brother of petitioner as per the registered
sale deed dated 07.06.1971 (Annexure-B). It is also stated
that, the land in question is a hilly, dry land, and also
classified as Kushki land i.e. Punja land. It is also to be
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56725
WP No. 16326 of 2015
CNR: KAHC010497112015
noted from the writ petition that, the husband of the
respondent No.3- Hukrappa Gowda had filed Form No.7
claiming occupancy right in respect of the land in question
under Section 48 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act,
1961. It is also to be noted that, the proceedings were
conducted before the Land Tribunal and the order dated
31.10.1981 came to be passed by the Land Tribunal and
the same was challenged before this Court in WP
No.3098/1982 and this Court, vide order dated
07.10.1985 (Annexure-F), allowed the writ petition and
remanded the matter to the Land Tribunal for fresh
consideration. Again the order was passed by the Land
Tribunal on 24.03.2005 and the same was questioned
before this Court in WP No.16112/2005 and this Court vide
order dated 25.01.2008 (Annexure-G) allowed the writ
petition and remanded the matter to the Land Tribunal for
fresh consideration. Hence, the Land Tribunal, vide
impugned order dated 14.12.2012 (Annexure-A) has
conferred occupancy right in respect of Sy.No.127/2A to
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56725
WP No. 16326 of 2015
CNR: KAHC010497112015
an extent of 2.00 acres of land to the legal representatives
of late Hukrappa Gowda and being aggrieved by the same,
the petitioner has presented this writ petition.
3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the
parties.
4. It is contented by the learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner that, the land in question is a
punja land, and therefore, the same cannot be cultivable
in nature, and therefore, conferring of the occupancy right
in favour of the legal representatives of Hukrappa Gowda
is incorrect, and accordingly sought for interference of this
Court.
Per contra
5. , Sri Venugopal M.S, learned counsel
appearing for the respondent Nos.3 to 11 sought to justify
the impugned order, and submitted that, the land in
question was in cultivation by late Hukrappa Gowda, as
per the record of rights produced at Annexure-C, and
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56725
WP No. 16326 of 2015
CNR: KAHC010497112015
therefore, contended that, the impugned order requires to
be confirmed. It is also submitted by the learned counsel
appearing for the respondent Nos.3 to 11 by referring to
Annexure-C, wherein at Column No.12, it is stated as
Kushki, and therefore, the land in question was under
cultivation by late Hukrappa Gowda, and therefore, sought
to justify the impugned order.
6. Smt.Sharada H V, learned Additional
Government Advocate appearing for respondent - State
produced the original records and sought to justify the
impugned order passed by the Land Tribunal.
7. In the light of the submissions made by the
learned counsel appearing for the parties and on careful
consideration of the impugned order passed by the Land
Tribunal at Annexure - A would indicate that, originally the
land in question was belonged to one Srinivasa
Bipadithaya, and thereafter, the same was purchased by
one Raghava Gowda as per registered sale deed dated
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56725
WP No. 16326 of 2015
CNR: KAHC010497112015
07.06.1971 (Annexure-B). Thereafter, it is also
forthcoming from the records that, late Hukrappa Gowda
had made an application in Form No.7 seeking occupancy
right in respect of the land in question.
8. On careful consideration of the writ papers
would indicate that, on earlier rounds of litigation before
this Court, the order passed by the Land Tribunal was
questioned, and accordingly the matter was remanded to
the Land Tribunal for fresh consideration. In the backdrop
of these aspects, on consideration of the original records
would indicate that, late Hukrappa Gowda was in
cultivation of the land to an extent of 2.00 acres of land
bearing Sy. No.127/2A of Ubaradka-Mithoor Village, Sullia
Taluk.
9. In that view of the matter, I am of the view
that, as the land in question was tenanted and also the
perusal of the RTC extracts would indicate that, the land in
question was under cultivation (Kushki) and in that view of
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56725
WP No. 16326 of 2015
CNR: KAHC010497112015
the matter, I am of the view that, no interference is called
for in this writ petition.
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.
SD/-
(E.S.INDIRESH)
JUDGE
BKM
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 36