STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANR. versus UPPEGOUDA AND ORS. ETC.

STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANR. versus UPPEGOUDA AND ORS. ETC.

Entries in revenue records alone are not sufficient to establish eviction or surrender; tenancy rights are protected by statute and, in absence of competent authority's order for eviction based on statutory grounds, tenant is entitled to registration of occupancy.

Parties
Appellant: State of Karnataka; Respondent: Uppegouda; Respondent: Respondent No. 2 (Land holder)
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
24 September 1996
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Judgment of Karnataka High Court in W.a. No. 196(a) and 197 of 1977
Outcome
Appeals allowed. Judgment of High Court set aside.
Legal Topics
Tenancy, Land Reforms, Statutory Tenancy, Eviction, Occupancy Rights
Land Law Tenancy Land Reforms Statutory Tenancy Eviction Occupancy Rights

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

State of Karnataka

Appellant

Uppegouda

Respondent

Respondent No. 2 (Land holder)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Judgment of Karnataka High Court in W.a. No. 196(a) and 197 of 1977

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a tenant continuing in possession as of vesting date is entitled to occupancy rights under Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 and Mysore Tenancy Act, 1952.
  2. 2 Whether surrender and entries in revenue records are sufficient to prove tenant's eviction.

Ratio Decidendi

Entries in revenue records alone are not sufficient to establish eviction or surrender; tenancy rights are protected by statute and, in absence of competent authority's order for eviction based on statutory grounds, tenant is entitled to registration of occupancy.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed. Judgment of High Court set aside.

Orders

  • No order as to costs.