In a decision of High court of Karnataka in case of S. Venkata Reddy Vs. Mulabagalappa and Others Reported in 2009 (3) KarLJ 294 Decided by Justice Arali Nagaraj, J. Date of Judgement: 28/01/2009 Regular Second Appeal No. 929 of 2002, It is observed that "It is not in dispute that the said land was granted to Mulabagalappa for the reason that he happened to be a member of scheduled caste. Therefore, the mortgage of the said land by the defendant-grantee in favour of the plaintiff authorising the plaintiff to enjoy usufructs was clearly in violation of the provisions of Section 4 of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978.
It is held by this Court in the case of R.H. Ramakrishnaiah v The Deputy Commissioner, Shimoga District and Others, 2000(2) Kar. L.J. Sh. N. 21, that usufructuary mortgage of the granted land amounts to transfer and if such transfer is without the previous permission of the State Government, it is null and void and mortgagee is liable to be evicted and the land has to be resumed by the Government for restoration to the grantee.
Therefore, following this decision, since the plaintiff transferee acquired the said land and mango trees by way of the said transfer made in his favour by the defendant without the permission of the Government, the said transfer shall have to be held 'null and void' conveying no right, title or interest in such land by the defendant in favour of the plaintiff. ……………………. Further, Section 5(3) provides that where any granted land is in the possession of a person other than the original grantee or his legal heir it shall be presumed, until contrary is proved, that such person has acquired the land by transfer which is 'null and void' under the provisions of Section 4(1) of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978. This being so, the burden is heavy on the plaintiff to prove that the said mortgage was not obtained by him in contravention of the provisions of Section 4 of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978."
It is held by this Court in the case of R.H. Ramakrishnaiah v The Deputy Commissioner, Shimoga District and Others, 2000(2) Kar. L.J. Sh. N. 21, that usufructuary mortgage of the granted land amounts to transfer and if such transfer is without the previous permission of the State Government, it is null and void and mortgagee is liable to be evicted and the land has to be resumed by the Government for restoration to the grantee.
Therefore, following this decision, since the plaintiff transferee acquired the said land and mango trees by way of the said transfer made in his favour by the defendant without the permission of the Government, the said transfer shall have to be held 'null and void' conveying no right, title or interest in such land by the defendant in favour of the plaintiff. ……………………. Further, Section 5(3) provides that where any granted land is in the possession of a person other than the original grantee or his legal heir it shall be presumed, until contrary is proved, that such person has acquired the land by transfer which is 'null and void' under the provisions of Section 4(1) of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978. This being so, the burden is heavy on the plaintiff to prove that the said mortgage was not obtained by him in contravention of the provisions of Section 4 of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978."
No comments:
Post a Comment