Karnataka Land Reforms Act 1961 Section 134 - Judgment Search Results
Home > Cases Phrase: karnataka land reforms act 1961 section 134 Page 1 of about 727 results (3.622 seconds)Shri Kudli Sringeri Maha Samsthanam Vs. State of Karnataka
Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1992KAR1827; 1992(3)KarLJ258
abundant source of income from the misc section 21a of karnataka religious and charitable inams abolition act provides that the deputy in the state on 1 3 1974 under the karnataka land reforms act 1961 hence there is no doubt that the act by the tribunal the provisions of the karnataka land reforms act 1961 applicable to enquiries by the tribunals under the before abolished and vested in the state under the principal act and of nullifying the orders of adjudicatory authorities which had judge under section 9 of the karnataka high court act 1961 are being disposed of by this common order 2 as and hence it is an ancillary provision to that sub section sub sections 8 9 and 11 of section 3 thereof
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTK.T. Plantation Private Limited and anr. Vs. State of Karnataka
Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 2002(6)KarLJ27
present writ petition is to declare section 110 of the karnataka land reforms act 1961 in short the land reforms act entitled to compensation as provided under section 72 of the land reforms act which reads as under section 72 amount payable of the object of the act which relates to agrarian reforms conferment of ownership on tenants ceiling on landholdings and for as has been done under section 21 of the acquisition act but it cannot in the guise of such an exercise of section 110 and notification issued thereunder challenged act of 1961 does not suffer from vice of legislative incompetence since act any property which has vested in the state government under section 3 instituted or preferred by or against the owners or
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTShri Dharmarayaswamy Temple Vs. Chinnathayappa
Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1990KAR4242
who was protected from eviction from any land by the karnataka tenants temporary protection from eviction act 1961 iii a person possibility of an inamdar securing occupancy rights in respect of lands under cultivation by ordinary tenants falling under section 9a of miscellaneous inams act question might arise whether applicant under land reforms act tenant under section 9a i under the mysore personal to occupancy rights under the provisions of the inams abolition act 2 they were not even deemed tenants as defined in land by the karnataka tenants temporary protection from eviction act 1961 iia a person who cultivates personally any land on lease lease under a lease created contrary to the provisions of section 5 and before the date of commencement of the amendment
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTR. Rudraiah and anr. Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.
Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1998IAD(SC)772; AIR1998SC1070; JT1998(1)SC435; 1998(1)SCALE375; (1998)3SCC23; [1998]1SCR553
beyond the period prescribed by section 48 a of the karnataka land reforms act 1961 hereinafter called the land reforms act n prahalad rao contends that section 48 a of the land reforms act 1961 which refers to the period of limitation amendment of 1979 is clarificatory or declaratory that the land reforms act 1961 was always applicable to lands attached to village not fit into the scheme of the land reforms abolition act 1961 36 learned counsel for the appellant relied upon the of limitation under section 48 a of the klr act 1961 with certain orders passed in proceedings under the karnataka village application could be filed 29 it is true that under section 4 1 of the village offices abolition act 1961 it
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTSri Andanur Rajashekar S/O Late Andanur Basappa Vs. Sri Vasavi Industr ...
Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR2007(1)KarSN2; 2007(2)KLJ547; 2007(2)KCCRSN69; 2007(2)KCCR1213; 2007(1)AIRKarR497; AIR2007NOC429
the said agreement is hit by the provisions of the karnataka land reforms act 8 after a full fledged trial the land reforms act deals with prohibition of purchase of agricultural land by a non agriculturist in which case the assistant commissioner extracted earlier 17 a perusal of section 80 of the reforms act would indicate that the transfer of land to a and also that the prohibition under the karnataka land reforms act will not enure the benefit of the defendants and it of the act has observed thus karnataka land reforms act 1961 karnataka act no 10 of 1962 section 79 80 scope by mr raghavendra rao the court had to deal with section 80 the scope of section 80 would be relegated to
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTSmt. Mallamma W/O Malleshappa Vs. Channegowda S/O Ninge Gowda,
Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 2009(1)KCCRSN14:2009(4)AIRKarR21.
aside appeal allowed tenancy jurisdiction sections 132 and 133 of karnataka land reforms act act whether civil court has no jurisdiction validity to the possession of the person claiming tenancy a landlord is also defined thus 2 20 landlord means a person for invoking the powers under section 133 of the land reforms act and if there is not even a remote possibility under sections 132 and 133 of the karnataka land reforms act the learned counsel for the 3rd respondent argued that there land owner as contained in the karnataka land reforms act 1961 and they are as under 2 34 tenant means an the land tribunal in view of the bar contained under section 132 and 133 of the karnataka land reforms act 11
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTVilas Alias Gundu Ananthacharya Vs. State of Karnataka
Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1987KAR1427
prevision to re assess the evidence section 121a of the karnataka land reforms act reads as the high court may at were raising sugar cane and other crops in the petition lands his evidence also appears to be rather artificial and appears rules as contemplated by section 113 3 of the land reforms act have been framed by the government they are known it reads as save as otherwise expressly provided in this act the provisions of the code of civil procedure 1908 central land by the karnataka tenants temporary protection from eviction act 1961 iia a person who cultivates personally any land on lease make the high court a second court of first appeal section 50 of the karnataka rent control act came up for
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTKengal Credit Co-operative Society Ltd. Vs. Bangalore Development Auth ...
Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1991KAR3593; 1991(4)KarLJ35
same is published as required under section 16 2 of karnataka land acquisition act karnataka extension amended act 1961 the bangalore portion of the order made under section 77 of the land reforms act reads the special deputy commissioner bangalore in his notification issued under the land acquisition act and the land reforms act the order of the state government made under the purpose unless scheme altered under section 19 4 of bda act orders reserving land for society lifeless amp nonest procedure to as a penalty under section 83 of the klr act 1961 iii according to the appellant pursuant to the order of development authority act 1976 karnataka act no 12 of 1976 section 73 karnataka land reforms act 1961 karnataka act no 10
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTSri. Mangilal Vs. the State Information Commissioner and Others.
Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR2010KAR3528
to whether the petitioner has violated the provisions of the karnataka land reforms act such a direction certainly could not have is in violation of sections 79a 79b of the kamataka land reforms act inasmuch as as on 01 03 1974 whether the notice issued by the 2nd respondent under the land reforms act is liable to be quashed and so also the not have been issued inasmuch as the state information commission acts only in the capacity of an appellate authority inasmuch as 1974 and section 79 a of karnataka land reforms act 1961 b copy of the enquiry reports conducted by the tahsildar prohibition of holding agricultural land by certain persons insofar as section 82 of the act it is ill respect of reporting
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTThe Corporation of the City of Bangalore Vs. B.T. Kampanna
Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1976SC2361; 1976(2)KarLJ205; (1976)3SCC716; [1977]1SCR269; 1976(8)LC763(SC)
clearly in error in referring to the tribunal under the karnataka land reforms act 1961 determination of the plea taken by cultivates personally the land he holds on lease from a landlord and includes i a person who is deemed to be respondent contended relying on section 133 of the karnataka land reforms act 1961 that the suit should be stayed by the is section 8 no other section of the land reforms act applies to these lands section 8 of the karnataka land the respondent claimed protection under the kamataka land reforms act 1961 it may be stated here that the mysore tenants temporary statement on 2 february 1973 the respondent contended relying on section 133 of the karnataka land reforms act 1961 that the
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT