Karnataka HC Sets Aside Tenant Heirs’ 4-Acre-5-Gunta Occupancy Grant, Remands Case For Fresh Evidence After Tribunal Relied On Pre-Remand Evidence

Late M.B. Kasetty purchased 5 acres 25 guntas in Sy. No. 100, Alkola Village, under a registered sale deed dated 23 January 1967.

Kariyappa, husband of respondent No. 3, sought occupancy rights by filing Form No. 7.

After successive challenges and remands, the Land Tribunal passed an order on 19 March 2018 granting Kariyappa’s legal representatives occupancy rights over 4 acres 5 guntas.

Kasetty’s legal representatives challenged that order, contending, among other things, that the Tribunal relied on evidence recorded before the most recent remand rather than evidence taken after it.

The High Court relied on the procedural requirement arising from its earlier remand order in W.P. No. 5667 of 1994: the Land Tribunal was required to reconsider the matter afresh in accordance with law.

The petitioners invoked Rule 17 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Rules, 1977, but the Court did not determine that contention or set out a separate interpretation of the Rule. No statutory provision or precedent was expressly applied as the basis for the Court’s decision.

The 13 August 1998 remand required fresh consideration by the Land Tribunal. However, the Tribunal’s 2018 decision was based on evidence recorded before that remand.

The Court therefore accepted the petitioners’ submission that the Tribunal should have considered evidence recorded after the remand. It set aside the order and directed reconsideration of Kariyappa’s Form No. 7 claim, with an opportunity for both sides to adduce fresh evidence.

The parties were directed to appear before the Tribunal on 23 November 2026 at 3:00 p.m.; the Tribunal was directed to dispose of the matter within one year of their appearance.