ORDER : The petitioner is before this Court assailing the order dated 23.12.2005 impugned at Annexure ‘A’ and the order dated 18.09.2007 impugned at Annexure ‘B’ to the petition. 2. The petitioner claims to be the owner of the land bearing Sy. No.86/P measuring 2 acres situated at Duglapura village, Kasaba Hobli, Tarikere Taluk, Chikmagalur District. The petitioner purchased the said property under the registered sale deed dated 01.08.1992 from the 4th respondent. The petitioner claims to be in possession and enjoyment of the said property ever since then. The mother of the respondents 3(a) to 3(c) namely Smt. Rajamma had filed a petition under Sections 4 and 5 of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 (the ‘PTCL Act’ for short) claiming that there is violation of the provisions of the said Act. The property in fact had been sold to respondent No.4 and thereafter the petitioners had purchased the same. 3. In view of the complaint, the proceedings in case No. SC:ST:48/2000-2001 was registered before the Assistant Commissioner. The Assistant Commissioner after adverting to the rival contentions, by the order dated 23.12.2005 had arrived at the conclusion that the sale deed under which the petitioner has purchased the property is in violation of the provisions of the PTCL Act and accordingly on setting-aside the same had forfeited the same to the Government and restoration was ordered. The petitioner claiming to be aggrieved by the same was before the Deputy Commissioner in the appeal filed in PTL No.24/2005-06. The appeal is dismissed by the Deputy Commissioner through the order dated 18.09.2007. It is in that circumstance, the petitioner is before this Court. 4. A perusal of the orders at the outset would indicate that the Assistant Commissioner no doubt at the first instance has arrived at the conclusion based on the rival contentions. When statutory appeal is provided under the Act, the Appellate Authority is required to re-appreciate the material on record in the light of the contentions and thereafter conclusion is to be reached. However, a perusal of the order dated 18.09.2007 would indicate that the order has been passed due to default of the petitioner in conducting the proceedings before the Deputy Commissioner. However, a perusal of the order dated 18.09.2007 would indicate that the order has been passed due to default of the petitioner in conducting the proceedings before the Deputy Commissioner. It is no doubt true that the Deputy Commissioner has referred to the dates on which the case had been listed for consideration and there being no re-presentation on behalf of the appellant, in that view, the Deputy Commissioner has dismissed the appeal. Though in a normal circumstance the Deputy Commissioner would be justified, what is to be kept in view is that when the parties are litigating with regard to the valuable rights relating to immovable property, evenhanded justice is required to be handed out and as such it would be appropriate that the Deputy Commissioner considering the appeal on its merits and re-appreciating the material on record as also the contentions arrive at the conclusion in accordance with law one way or the other. Since the consideration in any event is to be made by the Deputy Commissioner as the Appellate Authority, it is not necessary for this Court to advert to the consideration as made by the Assistant Commissioner, which order was in the appeal filed before the Deputy Commissioner. Therefore, to enable the matter to be considered by the Deputy Commissioner, the order dated 18.09.2007 in PTL No.24/2005-06 is set-aside. The matter is remitted to the Deputy Commissioner to restore the appeal, issue notice to the parties and reconsider the same in accordance with law. Needless to mention that until the appeal is considered and disposed of by the Deputy Commissioner, the order of the Assistant Commissioner shall not be given effect since the petitioner had the benefit of the interim order before this Court till the disposal of this petition. Petition is accordingly disposed of.