Karnataka Court January 1995 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Ramaiah Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-03-1995
Reported in: ILR1995KAR1597
ORDERHari Nath Tilhari, J.1. These Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution have been filed by the second purchasers of land in dispute. That according to the petitioners case as pleaded in the Writ Petitions, respondents-4 to 9 were grantees of land in dispute. That the respondents-4 to 9 sold the aforesaid land to one Avalakondappa by registered Sale Deed. That the petitioners allege to have purchased the Land from said Avalakondappa the original purchaser of land from Respondents-4 to 9. According to the petitioners case Respondents-4 to 9 were grantees of land on payment of the upset price and they have sold the same land to one Avalakondappa vide registered sale deed. Thereafter two petitioners purchased the property in dispute in the proportion as mentioned in paragraph 2 of the Writ Petition.2. The petitioners claim that after having purchased the land they planted coconut and fruit bearing trees and spent lot of money for raising certain other crops. According to t...
Shankrappa Vs. State of Karnataka
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jan-02-1995
Reported in: ILR1995KAR897; 1995(3)KarLJ422
ORDERHari Nath Tilhari, J.1. This is a Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. By this Petition the petitioners have sought quashing of the endorsement dated 23.5.94 in No. KLR:CR:20:94-95 passed by the Tahsildar, Kalghatgi District, Dharwad, as well as the petitioners have further prayed for Writ of Mandamus or a direction in the nature being issued to respondent to consider the application filed in Form No. 7 by the father of the petitioners in respect of the land in dispute, they have prayed for such other relief being granted or being issued as thisHon'ble Court deems fit.2. The facts of the case in brief are that after coming into force of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, according to the petitioners' case, as contained in paragraph 6 of the Writ Petition, petitioners' father moved an application in Form No. 7 on 10.8.1974 claiming occupancy rights in respect of the land in dispute viz., Plot Nos. 150, 154, 8 and 9 village Hullambi. According to the petitioners' ca...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›