Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, Kishan Pyari (since deceased, represented by LRs) and Smt. Pushpadevi, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking review of an order passed by this Court in W.P.No.41471/2002 dated 12.03.2003 and to quash the order dated 11.06.2002 passed by the Land Tribunal, Kalaburagi (second respondent) in proceedings No.LRA:DEC:4:75-76. The petitioners claimed to be the owners of land bearing Sy.No.501, measuring 31 acres 6 guntas, situated at Honnakinnage Village, Kalaburagi Taluk. They contended that the Land Tribunal had erroneously granted occupancy rights in favor of respondents 4 and 5 (tenants) under the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961. The petitioners argued that they were in self-cultivation of the land and that the tenants were not entitled to occupancy rights. The respondents, including the State of Karnataka and the tenants, opposed the petition. The court examined the records and found that the petitioners had not produced any material to show that the land was under their personal cultivation or that the tenants were not in possession. The court noted that the Land Tribunal had passed a detailed order after considering the evidence, including the entries in the revenue records and the statements of the parties. The court held that the review petition was not maintainable as there was no error apparent on the face of the record. The court also upheld the Tribunal's order, finding that the petitioners failed to discharge the burden of proof. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Land Reforms - Review Petition - Scope of Review - The court examined whether the order in W.P.No.41471/2002 could be reviewed. Held that the review petition was not maintainable as the petitioners failed to point out any error apparent on the face of the record or any other ground for review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. (Paras 1-4) B) Land Reforms - Occupancy Rights - Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 - Sections 44, 45, 48A - The Land Tribunal had granted occupancy rights to the tenants (respondents 4 and 5) in respect of land Sy.No.501. The petitioners claimed ownership and self-cultivation. The court upheld the Tribunal's order, finding that the petitioners did not produce sufficient evidence to prove that the land was under their personal cultivation and that the tenants were not entitled to occupancy rights. (Paras 3-5) C) Land Reforms - Burden of Proof - The burden was on the petitioners to show that the tenants were not in possession or that the land was not tenanted. The court found that the petitioners failed to discharge this burden, and the Tribunal's findings were based on evidence. (Para 4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.41471/2002 dated 12.03.2003 is liable to be reviewed and whether the impugned order dated 11.06.2002 passed by the Land Tribunal is liable to be quashed.
Final Decision
The writ petition is dismissed. The order passed by this Court in W.P.No.41471/2002 dated 12.03.2003 and the impugned order dated 11.06.2002 passed by the Land Tribunal are upheld.
Law Points
- Review jurisdiction
- Scope of review under Article 226
- Karnataka Land Reforms Act
- 1961
- Occupancy rights
- Tenancy rights
- Burden of proof
