Karnataka High Court
WRIT PETITION 65778 of 2012 on 13 January 1977
2025:KHC-D:6637
Digitallysigned by V NBADIGERLocation:HIGH COURTOFKARNATAKA,DHARWADBENCH,DHARWAD
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 21[ST] DAY OF APRIL, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M.G.UMA
WRIT PETITION NO. 65778 OF 2012 (LR)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI. VALAPPA
S/O. JEMALAPPA LAMANI,
SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR’S
1a.SRI. YAMANAPPA
S/O. VALAPPA LAMANI,
AGE: 45 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. BASALIKATTI TANDE, RANEBENNUR – 581105, HAVERI.
1b.SRI. NAGARAJ
S/O. VALAPPA LAMANI,
AGE: 40 YEARS,
2. SRI. HALAPPA S/O. JEMALAPPA LAMANI, SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR’S
2a.SRI. GOVINDAPPA S/O. HALAPPA LAMANI, AEG: 54 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. BASALIKATTI TANDE, RANEBENNUR – 581105, HAVERI.
2b.SRI. SHANKRAPPA
S/O. HALAPPA LAMANI, AGE: 52 YEARS,
OCC: DRIVER OF HEALTH DEPT., R/O. BASALIKATTI TANDE, RANEBENNUR -581105, HAVERI.
Page 1 of 4
NC: 2025:KHC-D:6637
WP No. 65778 of 2012
3. SRI. MOTLAPPA S/O. JEMALAPPA LAMANI, SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR’S. S/O. JEMALAPPA LAMANI, SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR’S.
3a.SRI. JAYYAPPA
S/O. MOTLAPPA LAMANI, AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. BASALIKATTI TANDE, RANEBENNUR – 581105, HAVERI.
3b.SRI. LAKKAPPA
S/O. MOTLAPPA LAMANI, AGE: 40 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. BASALIKATTI TANDE, RANEBENNUR – 581105, HAVERI.
4. SRI. LALAPPA S/O. JEMALAPPA LAMANI, SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR’S.
4a.SRI. VASANT
S/O. LALAPPA LAMANI, AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. BASALIKATTI TANDE, RANEBENNUR-581105, HAVERI.
4b.SRI. DHANRAJ
S/O. LALAPPA LAMANI, AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. BASALIKATTI TANDE, RANEBENNUR – 581105, HAVERI.
(BY KUM. VINUTA M. KHANNUR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. MADANMOHAN M. KHANNUR, ADVOCATE) SRI. MADANMOHAN M. KHANNUR, ADVOCATE)
…PETITIONERS
AND:
1. THE LAND TRIBUNAL, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, RANEBENNUR TALUKA, RANEBENNUR – 581105, DIST: HAVERI.
2. SRI. KUDLIGI SHRINGERIMATH, R/O. MOODAGATTI, POST: MEDLERI, TQ: RANBENNUR – 581105, DIST: HAVERI.
AGE: MAJOR (CORRECT AGE NOT KNOWN),
3. SMT. TIMMAVVA W/O. IRAPPA KORAGAR, AGE: MAJOR (CORRECT AGE NOT KNOWN), R/O. RAHUTANAKATTI, MEDLERI HUBLI, TQ: RANEBENNUR – 581105, DISTRICT: HAVERI.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. T. HANUMAREDDY, AGA FOR R1; R2-SERVED; R3-ABATED) R2-SERVED; R3-ABATED)
------
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 13.01.1977 IN NO.LRF(A)SR-60/1976 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ORDER DATED 18.10.1978 LRF(A)SR-158/1978-79 VIDE ANNEXURE-C PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 LAND TRIBUNAL, RANEBENNUR AND ALLOW THE FORM NO.7 FILED BY VALAPPA VIDE ANNEXURE-B IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M.G.UMA
ORAL ORDER
1. The petitioners have approached this Court seeking issuance of writ in the nature of Certiorari to quash the order dated 13.01.1977 produced as per Annexure-A, and the order dated 18.10.1978, produced as per Annexure-C, passed by the Land Tribunal. the order dated 13.01.1977 produced as per Annexure-A, and the order dated 18.10.1978, produced as per Annexure-C, passed by the Land Tribunal.
2. Heard Ms.Vinuta M. Khannur for Sri.Madanmohan M.
Khannur, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri.T. Hanumareddy, learned AGA for respondent No.1. Perused the materials on record. Hanumareddy, learned AGA for respondent No.1. Perused the materials on record.
Page 2 of 4
3. The petitioners are seeking to quash order dated 13.01.1977 produced as per Annexure-A and the order dated 18.10.1978 produced as per Annexure-C. Under Annexure-A dated 13.01.1977, occupancy right was granted in favour of respondent No.3, whereas under Annexure-C dated 18.10.1978, the claim of the 13.01.1977 produced as per Annexure-A and the order dated 18.10.1978 produced as per Annexure-C. Under Annexure-A dated 13.01.1977, occupancy right was granted in favour of respondent No.3, whereas under Annexure-C dated 18.10.1978, the claim of the
Page 3 of 4
NC: 2025:KHC-D:6637
petitioners for grant of occupancy right was rejected. Even though the orders were passed on 13.01.1977 and 18.10.1978 respectively, this writ petition came to be filed on 01.08.2012, i.e., after a lapse of more than 34 years. No reasons are assigned in the writ petition for the inordinate delay in challenging the said orders.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were not aware of passing of the impugned order at Annexure-C and therefore there was delay. Annexure-C refers to the presence of the petitioners before the Land Tribunal on the date of passing the order. Uunder such circumstances, the contention taken by the petitioners herein that the impugned order was not notified to them, and it was brought to their notice only in the year 2012, cannot be accepted. petitioners were not aware of passing of the impugned order at Annexure-C and therefore there was delay. Annexure-C refers to the presence of the petitioners before the Land Tribunal on the date of passing the order. Uunder such circumstances, the contention taken by the petitioners herein that the impugned order was not notified to them, and it was brought to their notice only in the year 2012, cannot be accepted.
5. The long delay and laches on the part of the petitioners in challenging the impugned orders defeats petitioners in challenging the impugned orders defeats their rights. When no grounds are made out to explain the delay, much less satisfactory grounds, I am of the opinion that the petition is liable to be dismissed in limine.
6. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.
Sd/-(M.G.UMA) JUDGE
gab CT:ANB List No.: 2 Sl No.: 1
Page 4 of 4
Loading citations and judicial treatment…