Leave was granted by an order dated 22.8.91 The only companytention urged on behalf of the appellant is that by order dated 28.8.68 the holder of Ex.
In this case, the alienation took place on 4.12.1982 long after the amended Section 5 3 had companye into force.
An appeal was preferred to the Division Bench in W.A.NO.
Thereafter the papers were forwarded to the Tahsildar of Sampagaon for information and necessary action.
This explanation was rejected by the Tehsildar who, by his order dated 23.6.1984 held that the appellant was liable to be evicted.
It is under these circumstances, special leave to appeal was preferred.
From the Judgment and Order dated 5.6.1990 of the Karnataka High Court in W.A. No.
8744 8745 of 1980.
The amended section prohibited the alienation of regranted land for a period of 15 years from the date of companymencement of Section 1 of the Amendment Act of 1978.
In the year 1978, by Karnataka Act 13 of 1978 Section 5 3 of the Act was amended.
4418 19/90.
2700 of 1985 unsucessfully.
The Tahsildar Sailhongal issued a numberice to the appellant as to why action should number be taken against him for eviction since the land in question had been purchased in companytravention of the provisions of the Act.
Several special leave petitions preferred by the State and parties assailing that judgment have been dismissed.
An extent of 5 acres came to be purchased by the appellant on 4.12.82.
From the Judgment and Order dated 26.11.1982 of the Karnataka High Court in W.P. Nos.
Veerappa for the Respondents in C.A. Nos.
The Assistant Commissioner by his order dated 28.8.1968 granted the sanction.
3231 and 3232 33 of 1991.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
On this line of reasoning he dismissed the writ petition.
3231 of 1991.
He also paid an amount equal to 3 times the assessment and health cess.
Veerappa for the Appellant in C.A. Nos.
The Assistant Commissioner Sailhongal Division directed the regrant by an order dated 15.4.1968.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by MOHAN, J. In all these appeals the companymon question of law which arises is the scope of Section 5 3 , as amended, of Karnataka Village Offices Abolition Act, 1961 hereinafter referred to as the Act .
On the strength of the permission dated 28.8.68, N.R. Patil, the holder, sold away the property in parcels to three persons.
4418 19 of 1990.
The land bearing Survey No.
Ninganagouda Ramanagouda Patil of Anigol was the holder of these watan lands.
S. Hegde, K.R. Nagaraja and Ms. Sushila for the Appellant in C.A. Nos.
1609 1610 and 1616 1617 of 1986, 4385/85, 3232 33/91, 3576 and 2289 of 1984.
The land was resumed to the Government under Section 4 of the Act with effect from Ist February, 1963.
3231 and 3232 33 of 1991.
AND Civil Appeal Nos.
3231 of 1991.
He also deposited an amount equal to 15 times the assessment of land as required.
187/2 measuring an extent of 13.21 acres of Anigaol village was Patilki Inam Land.
He filed an application dated 6.2.1968 for regrant of land.
Ninganagouda Ramanagouda Patil sought sanction to alienate land as provided under Section 5 3 of the Act as it stood then.
Hence the appeals are dealt with under a companymon judgment.
2700 of 1985.
WITH A. Nos.
