40 measuring 18 acres 32 guntas was an agricultural land belonging to one Laxmibai, situated in Harlapur village in Gadag taluka.
After the death of Smt.
The respondents thereafter filed an appeal before a Division Bench of the High Court, which was dismissed by an order dated 6th of June, 1983.
1687 of 1986 which was dismissed by the Appellate Authority on 14th of September 1987.
Aggrieved by the said judgment and decree of the civil judge, the appellants herein filed an appeal before the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Dharwad.
Against the said order, the respondents preferred an appeal before the Land Reforms Appellate Authority being L.R. Appeal No.
2088 of 1977.
7 under the Act for grant of occupancy rights on the ground that they were in actual cultivation of the entire land.
After companying into operation of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act in short the Act , Basanagowda, the father of the respondents filed Form No.
The High Court dismissed the revision petition, inter alia, observing that the party prejudiced can approach a civil companyrt to claim exclusive possession of the disputed land.
Both the above mentioned applications were registered on the file of Land Tribunal, Gadag.
2000 9 SCC 272, the High Court set aside the judgment of the appellate companyrt and allowed the appeal remanding back the matter to the first appellate companyrt directing it to decide the matter in accordance with law in view of the observations made by the High Court.
7 claiming that the said land was being cultivated jointly by the family, i.e. the family of Basanagowda, the father of the respondents, and Parwategowda, the father of the appellants.
The respondents filed a Second Appeal in the High Court against the aforesaid judgment passed in the appeal.
Parwategowda, the father of the appellants, simultaneously also filed an application under Form No.
On the basis of such an observation, the respondents thereafter filed a suit for declaration of title and possession in respect of the disputed land being O.S No.
The High Court dismissed the writ petition by its order dated 17th of December, 1982, inter alia, holding that the disputed land was taken on cultivation jointly by the family and that it was in joint cultivation.
Relying on a decision of this Court, in Balawwa Anr.
vs. Hasanabi Ors.
Against the said judgment and order, the respondents preferred a civil revision petition being CRP No.
The Civil Judge by its judgment decreed the suit holding that it had the jurisdiction to decide as to whether it was a joint family property or an individual property.
Meanwhile, the Land Tribunal after being remanded back the matter for demarcation of the disputed land between the parties by the High Court, allotted southern half portion to Parwategowda and his family and the Northern half portion to Basanagowda and his family by its order dated 3rd of January, 1985.
Feeling aggrieved by the judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court, the appellants filed this special leave petition, which was heard by us on grant of leave in the presence of the learned companynsel for the parties.
Aggrieved by the said order of the Land Tribunal, the respondents filed a Writ Petition in the High Court of Karnataka being WP No.
Laxmibai, her grand sons inherited the said land and it was under cultivation of the predecessor in title of the appellants and the respondents.
However, for demarcation of half portion of the disputed land, the matter was remitted to the Land Tribunal.
5632 of 1987 before the High Court of Karnataka.
On 21st of November, 1976, the Land Tribunal passed orders holding that Basanagowda and Parwategowda were jointly cultivating the lands and were entitled to occupancy rights in the said land.
TARUN CHATTERJEE, J. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 28th of August, 2001 of the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore in a Second Appeal whereby, the High Court had allowed the appeal filed by the respondents against the judgment and decree of the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Dharwad, remanding back the matter to the First Appellate Court to decide in accordance with law in view of the findings made by the High Court in the second appeal.
