- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:13491 WP No. 1023 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 1023 OF 2024 (LR) BETWEEN: 1. SRI MUNIRAJU S/O LATE MUNIVENKATAPPA @ ANNAIAPPA AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS 2. SRI GURUMURTHY S/O LATE MUNIVENKATAPPA @ ANNAIAPPA AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS 3. SRI RAJANNA S/O LATE MUNIVENKATAPPA @ ANNAIAPPA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS 4. SRI RAVICHANDRA S/O LATE MUNIVENKATAPPA @ ANNAIAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS 5. SRI BALAKRISHNA S/O LATE MUNIVENKATAPPA @ ANNAIAPPA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS ALL ARE RESIDING AT NO 138/3, 3RD MAIN, 9TH CROSS, BYRASANDRA, 1ST BLOCK, EAST JAYANAGAR BENGALURU - 560 011 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. R V SHIVANANDA REDDY., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPTD BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:13491 WP No. 1023 of 2024 VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR AMBEDKAR VEEDI BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. THE SPECIAL TAHASILDAR LAND TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK BENGALURU - 09 3. SRI A N MANJUNATH S/O LATE VENKATESH AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS 4. SRI SATHYANARAYANA S/O LATE N VENKATESH AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS 5. SMT SHARADAMMA D/O LATE N VENKATESH AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS R-3 TO R-5 RESIDING AT NO 73, 2ND MAIN ROAD, 3RD CROSS, ANJANEYANAGAR BANASHANKARI III STAGE BENGALURU - 560085 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SAVITHRAMMA., AGA FOR R-1 & R-2) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT / ORDER DATED 28/09/1979 PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA LAND TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK, BENGALURU SO FAR AS PETITIONERS ONLY (ANNEXURE-A) IMPUGNED ORDER / JUDGMENT PASSED IN LRF NO. 3995/1975-76 DATED 28/09/1979, BY ALLOWING THE WP, ETC. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:13491 WP No. 1023 of 2024 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA ORAL ORDER 1. An order of the Land Tribunal passed on 28.09.1979 is being called in question in this writ petition, which has been filed on 02.01.2024. 2. In other words, an order that was passed 45 years ago is being called in question. 3. It is the case of the petitioners that their grandmother Doddadasamma owned the lands and though she was arrayed as respondent No.5 before the Land Tribunal and Land Tribunal has stated that she had also appeared before the Land Tribunal and has recorded a statement, as a matter of fact, the said assertion was false in as much as Doddadasamma had passed away prior to the passing of the order in the year 1975. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:13491 WP No. 1023 of 2024 4. It is therefore contended that the order of the Tribunal is only against a dead person and, therefore, the same is in nullity and cannot be sustained. 5. At the outset, it is to be mentioned here though an assertion is being made that Doddadasamma had passed away in the year 1975 and the order passed by the Land Tribunal against a dead person, the fact remains that this order was not challenged by the children of Doddadasamma during their lifetime and the petitioners herein are only the grandchildren, who claim that the property belonged to their grandmother and the order is liable to be set aside. 6. If the children of Doddadasamma did not choose to challenge the order passed by the Land Tribunal, the entertaining of this writ petition at the instance of the grandchildren of Doddadasamma cannot be accepted. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:13491 WP No. 1023 of 2024 7. It has to be noticed here that the revenue entries were admittedly changed in the name of the tenant and this was obviously within the knowledge of the petitioners and also their parents and yet no action was taken by the parents of the petitioners to challenge the order of the Land Tribunal. 8. In my view, therefore, there was clear notice of the order of the Land Tribunal to the parents of the petitioners and yet they did not choose to challenge it and, consequently, it is deemed that they had accepted the order of the Land Tribunal. 9. It is also forthcoming from the representation produced as Annexure - L that only on 04.02.2019, an application was made for change of khata from the name of the petitioners' grandmother to theirs. In this representation, it is also forthcoming that one Jayakumar had secured a plan for construction of a multi storied building. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:13491 WP No. 1023 of 2024 10. This representation by itself would indicate that the land has lost its nature of agricultural character and is being utilized for non-agricultural purposes. It is therefore inconceivable that the petitioners continued in possession and were engaged in agricultural activities. 11. I am therefore of the view that there is no justification in entertaining this writ petition and this writ petition is therefore dismissed. 12. In view of the disposal of the petition, all pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of. Sd/- (N S SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE GSR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3