Munmun Kaur
Published On: January 06, 2022 at 18:59 IST
Recently, the Karnataka High Court held that the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 is a beneficial legislation and should not be used as a tool for aggrandising undeserving persons by showing them as tenants in respect of the lands. The Court further pointed out that the 1961 Act is meant to preserve, protect and also confer benefits on persons who are able to clearly establish the factum of agrarian relationship as tenant in respect of the land.
The facts of the case were that the Appellant Admar Mutt gave a land measuring 3,267 sq ft, including a house in Shivalli village to G Anantha Bhatta who was working as a cook at the Mutt. Later, G Anantha Bhatta filed an application in form number 7 of the KLR Act in respect of the land in question. The Land Tribunal, in December 2003, passed an Order granting occupancy rights. The Order was however, challenged by Admar Mutt before the Karnataka High Court but the Single Judge Bench dismissed the petition.
A Division Bench of Justice P.S. Dinesh Kumar and Justice P. Krishna Bhat, hearing the appeal, set aside the 2011 Single Judge’s Order and said that the tribunal had failed to hold proper enquiry to find out whether the ‘land’ and applicant ‘tenant’ come within the purview of the KLR Act. Also, there was no written document alleging the relationship of ‘chalgeni’ tenant between the Mutt and the cook.
The Bench further observed that the property in question, falling in the urban area within the limits of Udupi town municipality, cannot be a ‘land’ within the meaning of Section 2A(18) of the KLR Act.