In Brief
The State of Karnataka appealed against a High Court judgment that allowed a property owner to seek restoration of land forfeited for non-payment of revenue. The respondent's ancestors had purchased the land at auction in 1887 but it was forfeited in 1892 when revenue arrears accumulated. Though forfeited, the respondent's family remained in continuous possession and cultivation. An amendment to the Land Revenue Rules in 2000 permitted restoration of forfeited property if the person had not been dispossessed. The respondent applied within the statutory period. The Supreme Court held that the 1994 transfer of the land to the Forest Department (for a land bank) did not constitute 'disposal' under the rule, as the land remained revenue land; the respondent's uninterrupted possession satisfied the restoration requirement. The appeal was dismissed."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.