Smt. Thulasamma v. The State of Karnataka

Order dated

30.07.2024 passed in RFA No.1653/2011, wherein it was held that as between numbers denoting the area and the boundaries, the latter shall prevail over the former, should there be discordance. We are of the opinion that the said principle cannot be applied to the facts of the instant case. We notice that Mallaiah's case (supra) was a Regular First Appeal arising out of a suit for declaration of title, tried on

documentary and oral evidence, in which the survey numbers of the suit lands were not enumerated in the Notification and the identity of the lands had accordingly to be ascertained by reference to the boundaries described in the Forest Map. However, in the instant case, the proceedings arise out of a summary order of eviction under Section 64A of the Karnataka Forest Act and not a suit in which the identity of the lands has been tried on evidence. Further, the 1937 Notification in Statement 'C', expressly specifies old Sy.No.35 of Hukkunda Village and records that 40 acres was taken for the Indavara Reserved Forest and the balance of 6 acres 28 guntas is "Area remaining for the village." There is no question of survey numbers being omitted from the Notification or of the identity of the lands being uncertain. Further, if the contention that as between the extent set out in Statement 'C' and the boundaries described in the Schedule, the boundaries must prevail is accepted, then the entry in Statement 'C' appended to the 1937 Notification, carving out 6 acres 28 guntas as "Area remaining for the village," would be rendered meaningless.

We are unable to accept the said submission. Statement 'C' and the Schedule are parts of one and the same Notification and must be read harmoniously.

¶17It is also pertinent to note that the contentions now raised with regard to the discordance between boundaries and extent in the notification was never raised at any point in time earlier in these proceedings. Admittedly, the Statement annexed to the 1937 Notification also records that there is 6 acres and 28 guntas of Kharab Lands less assignments for Gomal after 40 acres are notified as forest land in Sy.No.35 of Hukkunda Village.

¶18The Additional Government Advocate also placed reliance on the decision of the Apex Court in I.S. Nirvane Gowda's case (supra), to contend that entries in the revenue records and Saguvali Chits do not confer title and the Revenue Authorities were not competent to deal with the property which was a part of the reserved forest. We notice that the principle laid down in I.S. Nirvane Gowda's case (supra), applies where the disputed lands form part of the reserved forest. However, in the instant case, a plain

reading of the 1937 Notification shows that 6 acres 28 guntas of Hiduvali land in Sy.No.35 of Hukkunda Village does not form part of the Notified forest. Therefore, I.S. Nirvane Gowda's case (supra) is distinguishable. Further, in light of the materials on record, including the Joint Survey Sketch furnished by Memo dated 10.10.2025 and the chain of title traced through the Saguvali Chits and the sale deeds in favour of late Shri B. Govindaraju, the finding of the learned Single Judge that the appellants had failed to disclose the manner in which their vendors acquired title in respect of the said extent cannot be sustained.

¶19In the facts and circumstances of the instant case, we are of the opinion that the impugned Eviction Orders and the Final Notice dated 28.09.2013, insofar as they cover the 6 acres 28 guntas of Hiduvali land in Sy.No.35 of Hukkunda Village claimed by the appellants is liable to be set aside. We also clarify that the impugned orders and the Final Notice dated 28.09.2013 shall stand insofar as they relate to the balance extent in Sy.No.35 of Hukkunda Village and the entirety of Sy.No.30 and 32 of

Indavara Village, and the eviction of the appellants from the said extent shall proceed in accordance with law.

¶20In the result, we pass the following:-

(i) The appeal is allowed.

(ii) The Order of the learned Single Judge dated

04.04.2019 passed in Writ Petitions No.46569-570/2013 (GM-FOR) are set aside.

(iii) The Eviction Orders dated 06.07.1998 and

26.12.2002 and the Final Notice dated

28.09.2013 which are under challenge in the Writ Petition insofar as 6 acres 28 guntas of land in Sy.No.35 of Hukkunda Village are set aside.

(iv) However, in respect of the balance extent included in the forest land notified in Sy.No.35 of Hukkunda Village and the entirety of Sy.No.30 and 32 of Indavara

Village, the impugned orders and the notice shall stand affirmed and upheld.

All pending Interlocutory Applications shall stand disposed of.

Sd/- (ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE

Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE

cp*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T WRIT APPEAL NO.1044 OF 2021 (GM, FOR) BETWEEN: 1 . SMT. THULASAMMA W/O LATE B. GOVINDARAJU AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS R/A UKKUNDA VILLAGE, INDAVARA POST CHIKKAMAGALUR TALUK AND DISTRICT-577 101 2 . SHANKAR KUMAR S/O LATE B. GOVINDARAJU AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/A UKKUNDA VILLAGE, INDAVARA POST CHIKKAMAGALUR TALUK AND DISTRICT-577 101 ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI. K. V. NARASIMHAN, ADV.) AND: 1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY FOREST DEPARTMENT M. S. BUILDING BANGALORE - 560 001 2 . THE DEPUTY CONSERVATIVE OF FOREST CHIKKAMAGALUR SUB DIVISION CHIKKAMAGALUR - 577 101 Digitally signed by PAVITHRA N Location: High Court of Karnataka ,,( ( 3,.,, THE,ASSISTANT,CONSERVATORS,OF,FOREST, CHIKKAMAGALUR,SUB,DIVISION, CHIKKAMAGALUR,-,577,101, , 4,.,, RANGE,FOREST,OFFICER, CHIKKAMAGALUR,RANGE, CHIKKAMAGALUR,-,577,101, , ...RESPONDENTS, , (BY,SRI.,VIKAS,ROJIPURA,,AGA,FOR,R1,TO,R4), , , THIS, WRIT, APPEAL, IS, FILED, UNDER, SECTION, 4, OF, THE, KARNATAKA,HIGH,COURT,ACT,,PRAYING,TO,ALLOW,THIS,APPEAL, AND,SET,ASIDE,THE,IMPUGNED,ORDER,DATED,PASSED,BY,THE, LEARNED, SINGLE, JUDGE, IN, W.P., No.46569/2013(GM-FOR), DATED,04.04.2019., , , THIS,WRIT,APPEAL,HAVING,BEEN,HEARD,AND,RESERVED, FOR, JUDGMENT, ON, 22.07.2026, AND, COMING, ON, FOR, PRONOUNCEMENT,OF,JUDGMENT,THIS,DAY,,ANU(SIVARAMAN( J.,(PRONOUNCED,THE,FOLLOWING:, , CORAM:, HON'BLE,MRS.,JUSTICE,ANU,SIVARAMAN, ,and,, HON'BLE,MR.,JUSTICE,VENKATESH,NAIK,T, ( CAV JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN) This writ appeal is filed challenging an Order of the learned Single Judge dated 04.04.2019 passed in Writ Petitions No.46569-570/2013 (GM-FOR). 2. We have heard Shri. K.V.Narasimhan learned counsel appearing for the appellants and Shri. Vikas Rojipura, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents No.1 to 4. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the appellants submitted that the appellants are the widow and son of late Shri. B. Govindaraju. It is contended that the appellants are the absolute owners and are in possession of 2 acres in Sy.No.35/P2, and 3 acres 35 guntas in old Sy.No.35/new Sy.No.119, situated in Hukkunda Village, Kasaba Hobli, Chikkamagalur Taluk. The said lands were purchased by Shri. Govindaraju under registered Sale Deeds dated 18.03.1977 and 08.06.1973, respectively. 4. Shri. Govindaraju died in the year 1997, and accordingly khata was mutated in the names of appellant No.1 and her sons in the revenue records. The total extent of Sy.No.35 of Hukkunda Village is 46 acres 28 guntas, of which 40 acres stands reserved as State forest and the balance is Hiduvali land. The Village Accountant of Indavara Circle issued a Hiduvali certificate, and the Tahasildar, Chikkamagalur Taluk issued a certificate in Form-B, Rule 4 read with Section 14 of the Coffee Act, 1942, in favour of the appellants' family. 5. In the year 1998, the respondent issued a notice to the appellants under Section 64(A) of the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 alleging unauthorized occupation of 14 acres of land in Sy.No.35 of Hukkunda Village and in Sy.No.30 and 32 of Indavara Village as the said area had been declared as Indavara Reserved Forest. In their reply, the appellants mentioned that they are the owners of 6 acres of land in Sy.No.35/P2 of Hukkunda Village as Hiduvali land purchased by Shri. Govindaraju, and regarding the remaining 8 acres they admitted to cultivation for the past 40 years as revenue land, in respect of which TT had been collected by the revenue authorities and an application for regularization under Section 94(A) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 had been filed. The Competent Authority passed an Order of Eviction dated 06.07.1998. Aggrieved by the said Order, the appellants preferred an appeal before the Appellate Authority. The Appellate Authority by order dated 26.12.2002, confirmed the o