M. P. CHANDRAKANTHARAJ, J. ( 1 ) THE petitioner claims to be a tenant of agricultural land bearing S. No. 483/c measuring 3-42 cents situated in Dana- pura Village, Hospet Taluk, Bellary District. The husband of the 7th respondent who was the owner of the said land, had borrowed money from the 5th respondent- service Co-operative Society Ltd. , and failed to repay the same. Therefore, the 5th respondent-Co-operative Society raised a dispute under Sec. 70 of the karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 which resulted in the award and decree as at Annexure-A to the petition. In execution of that decree, the 2nd respondent-Recovery Officer attached to the d. C. C. Bank, Hospet, brought the land in question to sale and the 6th respondent Kambli jambappa purchased the same in auction, That sale has been confirmed. Therefore, the petitioner who claims to be the tenant contends that tenanted land has vested in the government in terms of sec. 44 of the Karnataka Land Reforms act, on and with effect from 1-3-1974 free from all encumbrances and therefore the sale must be declared void, as the same is prohibited under the provisions of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act. ( 2 ) THIS Court in these proceedings initiated by the petitioner cannot determine the relationship of the petitioner witn that of the deceased husband of 7th respondent. That jurisdiction is exclusively vested in the Land Tribunal and the other authorities functioning under the Kama. laka Land Reforms Act. It is stated from the Bar that the application made by the petitioner to the Land Tribunal, Hospet, had not met with success and a writ petition filed against that order in this Court under Art. 226 of the Constitution has stood transferred to the Appellate Authority constituted subsequently under the amended provisions of the Karnataka Land reforms Act and the same is still pending before the Appellate Authority. Therefore, till the Appellate Authority gives a decision which becomes conclusive and binding on all parties finally, the petitioner cannot make a grievance of the sale in favour of the 6th. respondent which stands confirmed in execution of the decree against the 7th respondent, the deceased husband. ( 3 ) IF he succeeds, the law will take its course and no specific observation is required to be made by this Court in regard to matter pending before the appellate Authority. respondent which stands confirmed in execution of the decree against the 7th respondent, the deceased husband. ( 3 ) IF he succeeds, the law will take its course and no specific observation is required to be made by this Court in regard to matter pending before the appellate Authority. Therefore, the petitioner has no locus standi to prosecute the writ petition and it is dismissed. Petition dismissed. --- *** --- .