Dharwad: The Supreme Court has upheld the judgment of the Dharwad bench of the Karnataka high court docket in a case about just about five acres of treasured industrial land in Keshwapur, Hubballi. The judgment highlights how negligence of folks in following prison procedures in belongings matters can price them dearly.
The Dharwad bench in the 2015 judgment had declared the prison heirs of the late Shah Veljee Kanji as owners of the industrial land bearing CTS Nos. 361 and 366, measuring 1 acre 25 guntas and three acres five guntas respectively, on Kusugal Road, Keshwapur.
The department bench comprising Justices Ananda Byrareddy and Justice Sujatha held that the Kanji’s prison heirs have been the owners of five/eighth portion of the land and the Gadag Cotton Sales Society is the landlord and owns the remaining three/eighth share. The land was once granted to the family of Patils of Keshwapur village via the federal government underneath provisions of the Bombay Hereditary Offices Act, 1874. They have been categorized as Watan land.
This Act was once repealed via the Karnataka Village Offices Abolition Act, 1961 from March 1, 1963 and the land have been taken over via the state government via abolishing the hereditary village workplaces. Thus, the lands vested in the government unfastened from all encumbrances rendering the leases granted via the Patil family as void. Subsequently, underneath the KVOA Act, the lands have been regranted to contributors of the Patil’s family in 1973. On the date of the regrant, the Patils weren't in ownership of the lands and the Kanji’s prison heirs and the society have been in ownership to the extent of the proportion said earlier.
Meanwhile, Eureka Builders, in a bid to buy the land had entered into an agreement with the Patils, and approached the Supreme Court in opposition to the high court docket judgment.
The department bench of the Supreme Court comprising Justices Abhay Manohar Mishra and RK Agarwal upheld the high court docket judgment. It reasoned that the Patils ceased to carry any way of right, title and interest on the date of agreement (March 23, 2001) they usually may just now not have conveyed to Eureka Builders any right, title or interest in the belongings via virtue of sale agreement. A group of 14 advocates together with Vasant H Ron, CM Poonacha, GV Chandrashekhar and Anjana represented Kanji’s heirs.
Legal provision
The Karnataka Village Offices Abolition Act, 1961, which replaced the Bombay Hereditary Offices Act, 1874 from March 1, 1963 supplies that during case of regrant of the land to the unique owner must take the ownership of the land (in case he has leased it out) inside 12 years or record a go well with for the ownership inside 12 years. In the absence of any of those two, the grantee loses possession and the law allows the rent holder to turn out to be the landlord. Experts say that in the above case, the land was once regranted to the Patil family but they failed to either take ownership of the land or record a go well with for ownership inside 12 years. Their negligence made them lose possession and the leaseholder, who was once in ownership of the land, illegally turned into the landlord.
The Dharwad bench in the 2015 judgment had declared the prison heirs of the late Shah Veljee Kanji as owners of the industrial land bearing CTS Nos. 361 and 366, measuring 1 acre 25 guntas and three acres five guntas respectively, on Kusugal Road, Keshwapur.
The department bench comprising Justices Ananda Byrareddy and Justice Sujatha held that the Kanji’s prison heirs have been the owners of five/eighth portion of the land and the Gadag Cotton Sales Society is the landlord and owns the remaining three/eighth share. The land was once granted to the family of Patils of Keshwapur village via the federal government underneath provisions of the Bombay Hereditary Offices Act, 1874. They have been categorized as Watan land.
This Act was once repealed via the Karnataka Village Offices Abolition Act, 1961 from March 1, 1963 and the land have been taken over via the state government via abolishing the hereditary village workplaces. Thus, the lands vested in the government unfastened from all encumbrances rendering the leases granted via the Patil family as void. Subsequently, underneath the KVOA Act, the lands have been regranted to contributors of the Patil’s family in 1973. On the date of the regrant, the Patils weren't in ownership of the lands and the Kanji’s prison heirs and the society have been in ownership to the extent of the proportion said earlier.
Meanwhile, Eureka Builders, in a bid to buy the land had entered into an agreement with the Patils, and approached the Supreme Court in opposition to the high court docket judgment.
The department bench of the Supreme Court comprising Justices Abhay Manohar Mishra and RK Agarwal upheld the high court docket judgment. It reasoned that the Patils ceased to carry any way of right, title and interest on the date of agreement (March 23, 2001) they usually may just now not have conveyed to Eureka Builders any right, title or interest in the belongings via virtue of sale agreement. A group of 14 advocates together with Vasant H Ron, CM Poonacha, GV Chandrashekhar and Anjana represented Kanji’s heirs.
Legal provision
The Karnataka Village Offices Abolition Act, 1961, which replaced the Bombay Hereditary Offices Act, 1874 from March 1, 1963 supplies that during case of regrant of the land to the unique owner must take the ownership of the land (in case he has leased it out) inside 12 years or record a go well with for the ownership inside 12 years. In the absence of any of those two, the grantee loses possession and the law allows the rent holder to turn out to be the landlord. Experts say that in the above case, the land was once regranted to the Patil family but they failed to either take ownership of the land or record a go well with for ownership inside 12 years. Their negligence made them lose possession and the leaseholder, who was once in ownership of the land, illegally turned into the landlord.
Supreme Court upholds Dharwad HC bench’s order
![Supreme Court upholds Dharwad HC bench’s order]()
Reviewed by Kailash
on
July 07, 2018
Rating:
