Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 1532 (KAR)

K. Gopala Krishnamurthy v. State of Karnataka

2022-12-01

KRISHNA S.DIXIT

body2022
JUDGMENT 1. This Writ Petition lays a challenge to the Land Tribunal Order dtd. 15/3/2018. After service of notice, the State and the Tribunal are represented by the learned HCGP and the private Respondents have engaged their own Advocate. 2. Both the private parties having settled the lis within the frame of law, have filed a Compromise Petition dtd. 1/12/2022 which reads as under: "COMPROMISE PETITION FILED UNDER ORDER XXXIII RULE 3 OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE The petitioners and respondents No.3 to 9 begs to submit as follows:- 1. It is submits that, the petitioners herein have filed above said writ petition in order to challenge the order passed vide case No.LRF(N)\K\12\948\1974-75, dtd. 15/3/2018 on the file of second respondent before this Hon'ble Court against the respondents herein. In pursuance of notice issued by this Hon'ble Court, the respondents No.3 to 9 were appeared through their advocate. 2. It is submits that, the pendency of the above writ petition, the matter involved in the same came to be settled on the advice of elders and well- wishers on term of following terms and conditions. a) It is submits that, one K.Gopala Krishnamurthy was owner in respect of property bearing of Sy.No.(old)88\13, measuring 4 acres, presently New No. 182, situated at Kembaliganahalli Village, Nandagudi Hobli, Hosakote Taluk, Bangalore Rural District, and one Nallala Muniyappa was a tenant under him. The aforesaid K.Gopala Krishnamurthy is no more and the petitioners are his legal heirs and aforesaid Nallala Muniyappa is also no more and the respondents No.3 to 9 are his legal heirs. b) It is submits that, aforesaid Nallala Muniyappa has filed Form No. 7, for grant of occupancy rights in respect of property bearing Sy.No. 88\13, New No. 182, measuring to an extent of 4 acres situated at Kembaliganahalli Village, Nandagudi Hobli, Hosakote Taluk, Bangalore Rural District, which consist of boundaries i.e., East by: Property bearing Sy.No. 124\1 belonging to petitioner herein, West by: Property belonging to Subash Reddy, North by: Property bearing Sy.No.88\12 South by: Road. c) It is submits that, the aforesaid Nallala Muniyappa has filed a Form No. 7, for confirmation of tenancy rights in respect of Sy.No.(old) 88\13, measuring 4 acres, presently New No. 182, situated at Kembaliganahalli Village, Nandagudi Hobli, Hosakote Taluk, Bangalore Rural District, before second respondent and the same came to be registered vide Case No. LRF(N)\K\12\948\1974- 75. c) It is submits that, the aforesaid Nallala Muniyappa has filed a Form No. 7, for confirmation of tenancy rights in respect of Sy.No.(old) 88\13, measuring 4 acres, presently New No. 182, situated at Kembaliganahalli Village, Nandagudi Hobli, Hosakote Taluk, Bangalore Rural District, before second respondent and the same came to be registered vide Case No. LRF(N)\K\12\948\1974- 75. After enquiry the said proceedings held in favour of aforesaid Nallala Muniyappa by the order dtd. 8/11/1977 and confirmed his occupancy rights. Against the same aforesaid K. Gopala Krishnamurthy has preferred writ petition in W.P.No. 3649\1978, on the file of before this Hon'ble Court and the said writ petition came to be allowed by the order dtd. 6/7/1983 and thereby, remanded the said matter to the second respondent for fresh consideration. d) It is submits that, on receipt of the said order, the second respondent taken the said matter on board and conducted further enquiry and once again confirmed the occupancy rights in favour of aforesaid Nallala Muniyappa by the order dtd. 25/2/1989. By virtue of the said order the aforesaid K. Gopala Krishnamurthy preferred an appeal before appellate authority and the same came to be numbered as ALRA\39\1989 and thereafter after abolition of the said authority, the matter referred to this Hon'ble Court and renumbered as W.P. 34290\1998 and the said petition came to be allowed by the order dtd. 8/9/2000 and remanded the said matter once again for fresh enquiry. e) It is true that, on receipt of said order, the second respondent taken the said matter on board and once again confirmed the occupancy rights in favour of aforesaid Nallala Muniyappa by the order dtd. 30/10/2002. Against the same the aforesaid K. Gopala Krishnamurthy has preferred writ petition in W.P.2356\2003 on the file of this Hon'ble Court and the said writ petition came to be allowed once again on 20/8/2008 thereby, remitted the same to the second respondent for fresh enquiry. f) It is true that, on receipt of the said order the second respondent once again taken the said matter on board and confirmed the occupancy rights in favour of aforesaid Nallala Muniyappa by the order dtd. 15/3/2018. The pendency of the proceedings the aforesaid K. Gopala Krishnamurthy and Nallala Muniyappa were dead. The present petitioners are the legal heirs of K. Gopala Krishnamurthy and they have challenged the said order dtd. 15/3/2018, before this Hon'ble Court. 15/3/2018. The pendency of the proceedings the aforesaid K. Gopala Krishnamurthy and Nallala Muniyappa were dead. The present petitioners are the legal heirs of K. Gopala Krishnamurthy and they have challenged the said order dtd. 15/3/2018, before this Hon'ble Court. have agreed and undertaken that, in view of the settlement arrived between the parties they have restricted their claim only to the land bearing Sy.No., (old) 88\13, New No.182 of Kembaliganahalli Village, Nandagudi Hobli, Hosakote Taluk, measuring to an extent of 2 Two) acres 25 guntas only and they have not pressed (Four) acres. h) It is submit that, in view of the above said facts and circumstances the parties herein settled the issue and filed this comprise petition before this Hon'ble Court. In view of settlement arrived between parties have agreed and declare to bifurcate the entire property Sy.No. 88\13 (old), New No. 182 of Kembaliganahalli Village, measuring 4 acres. In view this comprise the petitioners herein are allotted the property which is more fully described in the 'A' schedule and the respondents No. 3 to 9 are allotted the property which is more fully described in the 'B' schedule as follows:- 'A' SCHEDULE PROPERTY (PROPERTY ALLOTTED IN FAVOUR OF PETITIONERS) All that piece and parcel of the property bearing old Sy.No.88\13, New Sy.No. 182, measuring 1 (one) acre 15 guntas, with karab, situated at Kembaliganahalli village, Hosakote Taluk, Bangalore Rural District and bounded on: East by: Property belongs to petitioners, West by: 'B' schedule property allotted in favour of respondents No. 3 to 9, North by: Property bearing Sy.No. 188, South by: Road and then property of Doddappaiah of Kambalipura Village. 'B' SCHEDULE PROPERTY (PROPERTY ALLOTTED IN FAVOUR OF RESPONDENTS NO.3 TO 9) All that piece and parcel of the property bearing old Sy.No.88\13, New Sy.No. 182, measuring 2 (two) acre 25 guntas, with karab, situated at Kembaliganahalli village, Hosakote Taluk, Bangalore Rural District and bounded on: East by: 'A' schedule Property allotted in favour of petitioners, West by: property of Subhashgar Reddy, North by: Property bearing Sy.No.188, South by: Road and then property of respondents No. 3 to 9. 3. It is submits that, all the parties herein have full consent to this compromise with their free will, mind and consent for taking their respective shares as specified in the schedule referred above. 4. 3. It is submits that, all the parties herein have full consent to this compromise with their free will, mind and consent for taking their respective shares as specified in the schedule referred above. 4. It is submits that, the parties to the compromise petition henceforth shall be the absolute owners sharing their right, title, possession and enjoyment of their respective shares fallen under the compromise petition. Further all the parties hither to be entitled to get their khatha in their respective names, in respect of their respective shares and pay tax to the concerned authorities and to improve their respective properties in any manner they desire. 5. It is submits that, the parties to this compromise petition are entitled to clear any encumbrance in any manner in respect of their respective shares allotted to them under the compromise petition and to raise loans for their better improvement or enjoyment of their properties allotted to them under this compromise petition. 6. It is submits that, the parties to this compromise petition has absolutely no right, title or possession in respect of the properties fallen to the share of the other properties under this compromise petition and shall have no rights to interfere with each other properties. 7. It is submits that, the parties to this compromise petition including their legal representatives also agree that, they shall not claim any right, title or interest in the schedule properties allotted in favour of the other parties. 8. It is submits that, both parties agrees that, they shall not claim any right over the properties allotted to the petitioner and respondents in terms of the compromise. It is agreed by both petitioners and respondents No.3 to 9 that, neither of the parties nor their legal representatives shall claim any right, title and interest in the parties allotted above as per the schedule properties stated in this compromise petition. 9. It is submits that, both parties have agreed and undertaken that, the allotment of their respective shares in the property bearing Sy.No.88\13 New Sy.No.182, as per the compromise petition rough sketch is enclosed by identified their respective shares and the parties have affixed their signature to the rough sketch which is part and parcel of the compromise petition and they have no objection for utilizing the said property allotted to their respective shares in future. 10. 10. It is submits that, other respondents also agree to the terms and conditions stated above and also declare that, in view of this compromise petition, the respective parties are the absolute owners of the properties as stated in the schedule. The parties shall not claim any right or title in the properties allotted to others as per the compromise entered into the compromise petition. 11. It is submits that, after this compromise the petitioners and respondents No.3 to 9 are undertake to co-operate each other regarding survey of 'A' and 'B' schedule properties for the purpose of fixing Haddabasthu of their properties. 12. It is submits that, the whereabouts of petitioner No. 6 in the above writ petition for the past two years and the petitioners have made various efforts to find out his whereabouts but did not yield any fruits and since petitioners and respondents No. 3 to 9 are resolving the dispute amicably, this compromise has been entered between the parties except petitioner No. 6 and the remaining petitioners have under taken that they also get any nature of documents in favour of respondents No. 3 to 6 from petitioners in order to safe guard their interest in further in respect of the properties allotted in their favour. 13. It is submits that, the respondents No. 3 to 9 herein have filed revision petition in Rev.Petn.No. 128/2018 on the file of Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore Rural District at Bangalore to challenge the order passed in R.A.(H). No.54\2008-09, dtd. 23/1/2017, in respect of property bearing Sy.No. (Old). 88\13, New No.182, measuring 4 acres of Kembaliganahalli Village, Nandagudi Hobli, Hoskote Taluk, against the petitioners herein and same is pending for ad-judication. In view of this compromise held in respect of property in question of this writ petition, the petitioners herein are undertaking to appear before the concerned authority either in person or through their advocate and set right the said proceedings within reasonable time. 14. It is submits that, both parties to this compromise petition have also identified their properties and also excess lands in the sketch enclosed to this compromise petition and the same is part and parcel of this compromise petition and the same is signed by the respective parties. 14. It is submits that, both parties to this compromise petition have also identified their properties and also excess lands in the sketch enclosed to this compromise petition and the same is part and parcel of this compromise petition and the same is signed by the respective parties. WHEREFORE, the petitioners and respondents No. 3 to 9 most respectfully prays that this Hon'ble Court be please to dispose the above said writ petition in terms of compromise and to grant such other relief\s, in the interest of justice and equity. Sd/- ADVOCATE FOR PETITIONERS PETITIONERS Sd/- ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENTS RESPONDENTS VERIFICATION We, the petitioners and respondents No. 3 to 9 do hereby state and declare that, what is stated above are true and correct to the best of our knowledge, information and belief. Sd/- BANGALORE dtd.:01/12/22 PETITIONERS Sd/- RESPONDENTS NO.3 TO 9" 3. I have perused the contents of Compromise Petition which in all runs into 14 pages including the map enclosed thereto. Every page bears the signatures of compromising parties. Learned Advocates appearing for them have also put their signatures thereto. I have interacted with the signatories who are personally present, and they are identified by their respective advocates. There is no scope for assuming fraud, fabrication or the like. The compromise petition prima facie is bonafide. There is no factual or legal impediment for recording the compromise and thereby disposing off the Writ Petition. In the above circumstances, it is ordered accordingly and Writ Petition is disposed off, modifying the Tribunal's order to the extent of compromise and accordingly, all authorities will construe the same and make entries in the revenue records and further issue Form No.10 for the modified extent of land in question within two months.