BENGALURU: “The Land Reforms Act, 1961, is undoubtedly a beneficial legislation. It is important to remember that this piece of legislation 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, for which Form No. 7 is filed by them to register them as occupants.
Such a legislation should not be allowed to be used as a tool for aggrandising undeserving persons by showing them as tenants in respect of the lands,” said the Karnataka High Court, while allowing a writ appeal filed by Adamaru Mutt, Udupi.
A division bench of Justice PS Dinesh Kumar and Justice P Krishna Bhat made this observation while setting aside the order passed by the single judge, granting occupancy right of a piece of land to the wife of the cook of Adamaru Mutt.
Anantha Bhatta, who is the husband of Yashoda, had filed an application in Form No. 7 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act in respect of 0.35 acres of land on Survey No.85/23 of Shivalli village of Udupi taluk. The Land Tribunal enquired into the matter and passed an order dated December 23, 2003, granting occupancy right in respect of 0-07-5 acres of land bearing Survey No 85/23, in favour of Yashoda.
Adamaru Mutt had filed a petition before the single judge against the order of the tribunal and the same was dismissed on April 21, 2011. Against this order, Adamaru Mutt filed the appeal contending that the Mutt and the applicant in Form No. 7 -- the late husband of Yashoda was working as cook in the Mutt. The residential premises with appurtenant land in question was given to him only for his occupation and therefore, the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to entertain the application filed in Form No. 7 in respect of the said land.
Inspect beggar rehab centre, mental health body told
The HC on Wednesday directed the State Mental Health Authority to inspect the Beggars Rehabilitation Centre in Bengaluru and take appropriate steps towards providing proper medical care to any mentally-ill patients there, within one month. A division bench of Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi and Justice Suraj Govindaraj passed the order after hearing arguments of the counsel of the petitioner that 30 per cent of inmates at the centre were mentally ill, but were not receiving proper treatment.