1.2.1963 and under the provision of Section 5 of that Act, the erstwhile holders of the village office companyld obtain re grant of the lands after the village offices stood abolished under Section 4 1 of the said Act and after the emoluments stood resumed by force of Section 4 3 of the said Act.
The said provision in Section 48 A was introduced by Karnataka Act 1 of 1979 with effect from 1.3.1974 fixing time limit for filing applications under Section 45 for registration as occupants before the Tribunal.
The village offices stood abolished under the Village offices Abolition Act, 1961, w.e.f.
Prior to his death in 1971, Narasimha Moorthi, one of the sons of Narasiah Sr applied before the Asstt.
After the Amendment in 1979, time stood extended for section 126 by Act 1 of 1979 was only classificatory and only removal of doubts.
55 and 62 respectively of Saneguruvanahalli village, Bangalore North Taluk.
Against the fresh order dated 19.4.1982, Kittamma filed appeal MA 20 of 1982 questioning the aforesaid order of the Tahsildar, before the appellate authority, impleading Lakshmi Narasappa her husbands brother and Prahlada Rao, her husbands nephew , as respondents.
48 A. Enquiry by the Tribunal, etc.
These words introduced by the amending Act 1 of 1979 fixing time limit read as follows before the expert of a period of six months from the date of the companymencement of Section 1 of the Karnataka Land reforms amendment Act, 1978 In view of the amendment made by Act 1/1979, the High Court held that the time stood extended only for 6 months from 1.1.1979 i.e. upto 30.6.1979 and this date being number in dispute, the application filed by the 1st appellant on 7.3.1984 before the Land Tribunal was time barred.
Of them Narasimha Moorthi who allegedly sold this property on 11.3.1970 to Rudraiah, 1st appellant died in 1971, leaving being him, his wife Kittamma 4th respondent in these Case .
This is why Kittamma is number supporting the case of the appellants.
It is to be numbericed that Veeranna, 2nd appellant son of Rudraiah 1st appellant claims to have purchased the share of Narasimha Moorthi from Kittamma.
1961 and hence the Tribunal did number have jurisdiction to decide the application filed under section 45 of the Land Reforms Act, 1961.
1.3.1974.
narasimha Moorthi filed an appeal MA No.21 of 1971 before the District Judge and as he died, his wife Kittamma came on record as appellant.
It is the case of the 1st appellant that even before 1961, he was the cultivating tenant of the land in question and companytinued to be in possession.
Commissioner by orders dated 22.6.1970 decided the lands should be re granted in favour of all three brothers, i.e. sons of the last holders and he did number accept the report of the Tahsildar that re grant should be in favour of Narasimha Moorthi husband of Kittamma alone for the entire land.
Later on, Narasiah Jr died in 1975 leaving being him Prahlada Rao 5th respondent .
The matter was remanded on 20.2.1973 and after remand, an order was passed on 19.4.82 by the Tahsildar again against Kittamma.
During the pendently of the appeal, Narasiah Jr, died in 1975 and Prahlada Rao, his son came on record in his place.
There are also another SLP C 14391/1981 by 1st appellants son Veeranna second appellant and others against an order in another CRP 624/1985 which was dismissed by this Court on 9.5.1991 .
The appellant No.1 seeks to have the period of limitation extended beyond 30.6.1979 by linking up the companymencement of limitation under Section 48 A of the KLR Act, 1961 with certain orders passed in proceedings under the Karnataka Village offices Abolition Act, 1961 hereinafter called the Village offices Abolition Act, 1961 against Kittamma, wife of Narasimha Murthy 4th respondent and in favour of Lakshmi Narasappa 3rd respondent and S.N.Prahlada Rao 5th respondent .
on and from the said date i.e. 1.3.1974 stand transferred to and vest in the State Government.
The applicants tenants, on the other hand, companytended that the lands were number attached to village offices but were Devadayam Inam lands, and that the services attached to temples and the inam lands attached to the said services were both abolished w.e.f.
In those revisions the appellants were respondents.
The revisions filed in the High Court under Section 121 A of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 were allowed, setting aside the orders dated 7.11.1987 passed by the appellate authority and by the Land Tribunal on 27.4.1987 registering occupancy rights in favour of the first appellant i.e. B.Rudraiah in respect of 3 acres 34 juntas and 1 acre 24 juntas in Survey No.
Further, the respondent 3 and 5 did number.
they being her husbands brother and deceased brothers son respectively.
The above is a rsum of the facts in the proceedings under section 5 of the Village Officers Abolition Act, 1961.
625 of 1988 and CRP No.
3 for being impleaded as purchaser of the entire property from narasimha Moorthi and the said application for implement was allowed on 30.1.84 by the Addl.
In each of these appeals, the appellants are Sri B. Rudraiah and his son Sri B.Veeranna.
Thereafter, the appeal of Kittamma was dismissed on 17.12.1984 and the revision of Kittamma CRP 300 OF 1985 was also dismissed by the High Court on 22.1.1985.
City Civil Judge, thew appellate authority.
His son B. Veeranna has joined as the second appellant.
This was companytested by his brother S.K. Lakshmi Narasappa 3rd respondent and narasiah Jr. It appears that the Asstt.
Then companye Sections 45 and 48 A as amended by Act 1/1979 and they read as follows Tenants to be registered as occupants of land on certain companyditions, 1 Subject to the provision of the succeeding sections of this Chapter, every person who was a permanent tenant, protected tenant or other tenant or where a tenant has lawfully sublet, such subtenant shall with effect on and from the date of vesting be entitled to be registered as an occupant in respect of the lands of which he was a permanent tenant, protected tenant or other tenant or sub tenant before the date of vesting and which he has been cultivating personally.
Kittamma wife of Late Narasimha Murthy 4th respondent and Sri S.N. Prahlada Rao, son of Late Narasiah Jr. 5th respondent .
In that appeal, the 1st appellant Rudraiah filed IA No.
Commissioner under section 5 of the KVO Act, 1961 for re grant of the entire lands exclusively in his favour.
These two appeals aeon directed against the order sin CRP No.
Th rights thereto, according the respondents 3 and 5 devolved on the death of Narasiah Sr upon his aforesaid three sons.
JAGANNADHA RAO.
The lands in question were emoluments attached to the said village office.
Kittammas SLP c 9387 of 1985 was dismissed by this Court on 9.1.1987.
The main ground on which the High Court has allowed the revisions of respondents 3 and 5 and dismissed the Form 7 applications of the 1st appellant b. Rudraiah is that the said application for grant of occupancy right was filed on 7.3.1984 beyond the period prescribed by Section 48 A of the Karnataka Land Reforms act, 1961 hereinafter called the Land Reforms Act, 1961 .
2829 of 1988 dated 18.7.1989 of the karnataka High Court allowing the said revisions which were Karnataka High Court allowing the said revisions which were filed by Lakshmi Narasappa 3rd respondent and S.N. Prahlada Ram.
The party respondents are Sri Lakshmi Narasappa 3rd respondent .
It appears that appellant also filed CRP 654 of 1985 and it was rejected on 30.7.1989.
J. Leave granted in both SLPs.
Aggrieved by the orders of the High Court dated 18.7.1989, these two appeals are filed by Rudraiah, the aggrieved party.
5th respondent respectively.
