9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (2) TMI 822X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Bench of the Karnataka High Court refusing to interfere with the order passed by learned Single Judge in view of the fact that the Ankola Taluk Land Tribunal(in short the 'Tribunal') had disposed of the matter pursuant to the direction given by learned Single Judge. The appellants had filed the writ appeal before the Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court aggrieved primarily by that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hold that though the learned Single Judge had directed grant of occupancy rights and the Tribunal had followed the directions, it was open to the present appellants to question the correctness of the decision of the Tribunal before the learned Single Judge. Accordingly the writ appeal was dismissed. In support of the appeal, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the Division Bench ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Single Judge to grant occupancy rights to the respondents. That was the basic issue which was to be adjudicated by the Division Bench in the writ appeal. The basic issue, as noted above was whether the direction given by learned Single Judge could be maintained, when the matter was being remitted by learned Single Judge to the Tribunal for fresh adjudication. In a given case there can be limited r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The High Court was not justified in holding that the writ appeal had been rendered infructuous because of the subsequent decision of the Tribunal. Correctness of the order passed by learned Single Judge was being challenged in the writ appeal. Any decision taken by the Tribunal has to be per force subject to the decision in the writ appeal. Therefore, the Division Bench should have considered ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
