GUNTAIAH AND ORS. versus HAMBAMMA AND ORS.

GUNTAIAH AND ORS. versus HAMBAMMA AND ORS.

Conditions restricting alienation imposed even under Rule 43-J are legally valid as the State, being paramount title-holder, can impose conditions on grants not opposed to law, and Section 4 of Act 2 of 1979 renders transfers contrary to grant terms null and void.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Guntaiah and Ors.; Respondent: Hambamma and Ors.; Intervenor: State of Karnataka
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
22 July 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Karnataka High Court
Outcome
Appeals allowed; impugned judgment of the Karnataka High Court set aside.
Legal Topics
Interpretation of Statutes, Alienation of Granted Land, Prohibition of Transfer, Restoration of Land, Social Welfare Grants, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
Land Law Administrative Law Constitutional Law Interpretation of Statutes Alienation of Granted Land Prohibition of Transfer Restoration of Land Social Welfare Grants +1 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Guntaiah and Ors.

Appellant

Hambamma and Ors.

Respondent

State of Karnataka

Intervenor

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Karnataka High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether authorities granting land under Rule 43-J of Mysore Land Revenue (Amendment) Rules, 1960, can impose a condition restricting alienation for 15 years?
  2. 2 Are conditions restricting alienation imposed under Rule 43-G applicable to grants made under Rule 43-J?
  3. 3 Validity of transfers made in contravention of grant conditions under Act 2 of 1979?

Ratio Decidendi

Conditions restricting alienation imposed even under Rule 43-J are legally valid as the State, being paramount title-holder, can impose conditions on grants not opposed to law, and Section 4 of Act 2 of 1979 renders transfers contrary to grant terms null and void.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed; impugned judgment of the Karnataka High Court set aside.

Orders

  • Order of Single Judge upheld.
  • Authorities to take action under Act 2 of 1979 within three months.