STATE OF KARNATAKA vs MRS. A SAVITHRI
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58135-DB
CCC No. 213 of 2023
C/W WA No. 107 of 2022
WA No. 1221 of 2022
CNR: KAHC010114122023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 13 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S.BHARATH KUMAR
CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 213 OF 2023
C/W
WRIT APPEAL NO. 107 OF 2022 (KLR-RES)
WRIT APPEAL NO. 1221 OF 2022 (KLR-RR/SUR)
IN CCC No. 213/2023
BETWEEN:
1. MRS A SAVITHRI
W/O LATE SUBBANNA BHAT
AGED ABOUT 81 YEARS,
2. MR. A VISHNU BHAT
S/O LATE SUBBANNA BHAT
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS,
3. MR. SHAILINI
W/O LATE SUBBANNA BHAT
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS,
4. MR. A ISHWARA BHAT
W/O LATE SUBBANNA BHAT
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,
Digitally
signed by
PAVITHRA N
Location:
High Court
of Karnataka
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58135-DB
CCC No. 213 of 2023
C/W WA No. 107 of 2022
WA No. 1221 of 2022
CNR: KAHC010114122023
5. MR. A NAGARAJ
S/O LATE A. SUBBANNA BHAT
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,
6. USHA KUMARI
D/O LATE A. SUBBANNA BHAT
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
7. SATHYA BHAMA
D/O LATE SUBBANNA BHAT
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
ALL ARE R/AT ALANGARU HOUSE,
VITLA MADNUR BANTWAL TQ.
D.K DISTRICT-574214
NO.1, 3 TO 7
REP. BY GPA HOLDER
MR.A.VISHNU BHAT
…COMPLAINANTS
(BY SRI. N SUKUMAR JAIN, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. K V RAJENDRA
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
MANGALORE D.K DISTRICT-575 001
PRESENTLY WORKING AS
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
MYSORE 571129
2. MULLARI MUHILAN
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
MANGALURU, D.K. DISTRICT - 575001
…ACCUSED
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58135-DB
CCC No. 213 of 2023
C/W WA No. 107 of 2022
WA No. 1221 of 2022
CNR: KAHC010114122023
3. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REVENUE DEPARTMENT
MULTISTORY BUILDING
BENGALURU-560 001
REP. BY ITS SECRETARY
…PROFORMA RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. SPOORTHY HEGDE, HCGP FOR R1-3)
THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE
CONTEMPT OF COURT ACT, 1971, PRAYING TO TRY THE
ACCUSED FOR NOT OBEYING OR COMPLYING THE ORDER
DATED 25.07.2019 PASSED IN W.P.NO.43058/2016 AND THE
ORDER DATED 01.06.2022 PASSED IN R.P.NO.166/2022, BY
THIS COURT MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A AND ANNEXURE "C"
AND ETC.
IN WA NO. 107/2022
BETWEEN:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP BY SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
M S BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
MANGALURU, D.K. DISTRICT-575
3. THE THASILDAR
BELTHANGADY TALUK, D K DISTRICT
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. SPOORTHY HEGDE, HCGP)
AND:
MR GUNAPAL ATHIKARI
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58135-DB
CCC No. 213 of 2023
C/W WA No. 107 of 2022
WA No. 1221 of 2022
CNR: KAHC010114122023
S/O LATE CHANDRAVTHI
AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS
KADAMBILA MOKODI
VILLAGE, BELTHANGADY TALUK
D K DISTRICT-574214
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. N.SUKUMAR JAIN, ADV)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE WRIT APPEAL AND
SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 22/02/2019 PASSED BY THE
LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WP NO.23608/2018
IN WA NO. 1221/2022
BETWEEN:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY ITS REVENUE DEPARTMENT
MULTISTOREY BUILDING,
BANGALORE - 560001
REP BY ITS SECRETARY
2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
MANGALORE, D.K. DIST 575 001
3. TAHSILDAR
BANTWAL, D.K. DISTRICT 575 001
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. N.SUKUMAR JAIN, ADV.)
AND:
1. MRS. A SAVITHRI
W/O LATE SUBBANNA BHAT
AGED 82 YEARS
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58135-DB
CCC No. 213 of 2023
C/W WA No. 107 of 2022
WA No. 1221 of 2022
CNR: KAHC010114122023
2. MR. A VISHNU BHAT
S/O LATE SUBBANNA BHAT
AGED 65 YEARS
3. MR SHALINI
D/O LATE SUBBANNA BHAT
AGED 62 YEARS
4. MR.A. ISHWARA BHAT
S/O LATE SUBBANNA BHAT
AGED 60 YEARS
5. MR. A NAGARAJ
S/O LATE A.SUBBANNA BHAT
AGED 59 YEARS
6. USHA KUMARI
D/O LATE A. SUBBANNA BHAT
AGED 56 YEARS
7. SATHYA BHAMA
D/O LATE SUBBANNA BHAT
AGED 52 YEARS
ALL ARE R/AT ALANGARU HOUSE,
VITLA MADNUR BANTWAL TQ
D K DIST. - 574214
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SPOORTHY HEGDE, HCGP FOR R1-3)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT ACT,1961, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 25.07.2019 PASSED BY THE
LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS COURT IN WP No-
43058/2016 (KLR-RR/SUR).
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58135-DB
CCC No. 213 of 2023
C/W WA No. 107 of 2022
WA No. 1221 of 2022
CNR: KAHC010114122023
THESE APPEALS AND PETITION COMING ON FOR
ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS
UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S.BHARATH KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN)
Writ Appeal No.107/2022 is preferred against the
judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 22.02.2019 passed
in W.P. No.23608/2018. Writ Appeal No.1221/2022 is
preferred against the judgment of the learned Single Judge
dated 25.07.2019 passed in W.P. No.43058/2016. The
Contempt of Court Case No. 213/2023 is preferred alleging
willful disobedience of the order of the learned Single Judge
dated 25.07.2019 passed in W.P.No.43058/2016 and the order
dated 01.06.2022 passed in R.P. No.166/2022.
2. Learned HCGP appearing for the appellants- State
submits that land had been granted to the respondent 30 years
ago for the purpose of cashew cultivation as a conditional
grant. It is submitted that after 30 years, the grantee was
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58135-DB
CCC No. 213 of 2023
C/W WA No. 107 of 2022
WA No. 1221 of 2022
CNR: KAHC010114122023
given an option to acquire permanent ownership of the lands in
question on payment of the nominal price. It is further
contended that the appellants had sought for the payment of
the market price, which was challenged by the grantee before
the learned Single Judge.
3. It is submitted that the learned Single Judge,
relying on the decisions of this Court in Writ Appeal
No.5242/2004 and connected cases as well as an order of the
learned Single Judge in W.P.No.23692/2012 held that the
nominal price to be fixed by the Deputy Commissioner would
only be 300 times of the market value at the time of the grant
and directed the Deputy Commissioner to accept the nominal
price and to issue Permanent Ownership Certificate to the writ
petitioners within three months.
4. The learned HCGP submits that the Karnataka Land
Grant Rules, 1969 ("the 1969 Rules" for short) specifically
provide for the fixing of market price for the grant of lands for
cashew cultivation and that the market value has to be fixed by
the Deputy Commissioner under Rule 17 of the 1969 Rules.
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58135-DB
CCC No. 213 of 2023
C/W WA No. 107 of 2022
WA No. 1221 of 2022
CNR: KAHC010114122023
5. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent
would point out that Rule 17 of the 1969 Rules would have no
application to the present case since Rule 17 specifically
provides for the fixing of market price for the grant of land. It is
submitted that Rule 17 would be applicable only when land is
granted for the first time for cashew cultivation and not in a
case where a grant has already taken effect much prior to the
1969 Rules being promulgated and where the option to acquire
permanent ownership is exercised after the period mentioned in
the grant.
6. It is submitted that Rule 23 of the 1969 Rules starts
with a non-obstante clause and specifically provides that where
agricultural lands were leased temporarily before the
commencement of the 1969 Rules and the lease contemplates
subsequent grant of land to the lessee and all the conditions of
the lease have been complied with, such lands may be granted
to the lessee by the Deputy Commissioner on payment of the
price fixed by him in accordance with the Rules under which the
lands were leased.
- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58135-DB
CCC No. 213 of 2023
C/W WA No. 107 of 2022
WA No. 1221 of 2022
CNR: KAHC010114122023
7. It is submitted that in the absence of specific
provisions in the Rules by which the lands were leased, this
Court in the judgments in Writ Appeal No.5242/2004 and
connected cases as well as in other judgments including in Writ
Appeal No.202/2020 has specifically held that the nominal
value to be fixed by the Deputy Commissioner should be
confined to 300 times the land revenue payable per acre for the
issue of permanent ownership.
8. The learned counsel for the writ petitioner submits
that the land was initially leased to the petitioner on a specific
condition that the petitioner could opt for permanent ownership
on payment of the value of the property at the relevant time
i.e., as on the date of the grant. It is further contended that the
provisions of the 1969 Rules would have no application to the
case in question since the land had been granted in the year
1958 in terms of the provisions of the South Kanara District
Lease of Lands for Cashew Cultivation Rules, 1957 ("the 1957
Rules" for short).
- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58135-DB
CCC No. 213 of 2023
C/W WA No. 107 of 2022
WA No. 1221 of 2022
CNR: KAHC010114122023
9. The learned HCGP has placed reliance on the
judgment of this Court in W.A. No.417/2025 and connected
cases.
10. Having considered the contentions advanced, we
notice that the grant has been made under Rule 2 r/w Rule 5 of
the 1957 Rules. It is specifically provided that the grant will be
for temporary occupation for the purpose of raising cashew
cultivation for a period of 30 years. It is also provided that the
grantee has the option for renewal of the lease on the expiry of
30 years period, if he fulfills the terms and conditions of the
grant satisfactory. The grantee shall also have the option to
acquire permanent ownership of the land on the expiry of 30
years, on payment of the value of the land fixed at the time of
the grant itself. The site value of the land was fixed at Rs.25/-
per acre.
11. The learned HCGP would take us through the
conditions provided in the grant. However, we notice that there
is absolutely no contention raised that the respondent had not
complied with any of the conditions of the grant or that he had
- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58135-DB
CCC No. 213 of 2023
C/W WA No. 107 of 2022
WA No. 1221 of 2022
CNR: KAHC010114122023
not used the property for cashew cultivation for the 30 years
for which the land had been granted.
12. We further notice that Rule 23 of the 1969 Rules
specifically provides for the confirmation of the lands on
payment of the price fixed by the Deputy Commissioner in
accordance with the rules under which the lands were leased.
After considering the identical contentions, the Coordinate
Benches of this Court have specifically held that the land value
has to be fixed at 300 times the land revenue payable per acre.
13. In the instant case, the learned Single Judge has
considered those judgments and has held that the land value is
to be fixed accordingly. Though the learned HCGP has placed
reliance on the judgments of the Coordinate Bench of this Court
in Writ Appeal No.417/2025 and connected cases, we notice
that the question of adequacy of the value of the land has not
been considered in the said case and the only question that has
been considered is whether there can be a condition with
regard to the alienation of the property after the grant is made
permanent.
- 12 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58135-DB
CCC No. 213 of 2023
C/W WA No. 107 of 2022
WA No. 1221 of 2022
CNR: KAHC010114122023
14. In the above view of the matter, we are of the
opinion that there is no error in the exercise of jurisdiction by
the learned Single Judge. The appeal fails, same is accordingly
dismissed
. The directions issued by the learned Single Judge
shall be complied with within three months from the date of
receipt of a copy of this judgment.
15. The Contempt of Court Case is closed . In case the
directions are not complied with, within three months as
directed, the complainant will be at liberty to reopen the
matter. Notice issued to the accused in Contempt of Court
Case is discharged.
Sd/-
(ANU SIVARAMAN)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(K.S.BHARATH KUMAR)
JUDGE
PN
List No.: 3 Sl No.: 5