- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:2169 WP No. 228 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO.228 OF 2025 (KLR-RR/SUR) BETWEEN: SRI M.B. MANJUNATH S/O LATE BASAVEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/AT MANCHADEVANAHALLI VILLAGE, PERIYAPATNA TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT-571107. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. H. S. SHANKAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS, MYSURU DIVISION, MYSURU-570001. 3. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS, PERIYAPATNA, PERIYAPATNA TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT-571107. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, PERIYAPATNA TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT-571107. Digitally signed by AL BHAGYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:2169 WP No. 228 of 2025 5. M.K. PRAKASH, S/O KALEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/AT MANCHADEVANAHALLI VILLAGE, PERIYAPATNA TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT-571107. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MANJUNATH K., HCGP ) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT BEARING NO. BHU.SA.NI/E.PHO.SUM/352/2024-25 DATED 31.12.2024 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS WHICH IS HEREIN PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE - G; DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS NO.1 TO 4 TO CONSIDER THE APPLICATION PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE -F DATED 02.09.2024 AND CONDUCT PHODI WORK AS PER THE ORDER PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER Learned HCGP is directed to take notice to respondents 1 to 4. 2. Petitioner is asserting title based on a registered sale deed dated 18.12.2019 executed by the brother of respondent No.5, while respondent No.5 alleging that the petitioner on the strength of the sale - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:2169 WP No. 228 of 2025 deed is interfering with his possession has approached the civil Court by filing a suit for injunction simplicitor. Records reveal that respondent No.5 has filed the suit in O.S.9/2020 and injunction is operating against the petitioner. 3. The contention raised by the petitioner, asserting that the mere filing of a suit for injunction by respondent No.5 would not serve as an impediment for the authorities to carry out the processes of phodi and durasthi, appears to be fundamentally misconceived. Permitting such actions during the pendency of the suit would risk altering the nature and character of the suit property, which is currently the subject matter of O.S. No. 9/2020. It is important to note that an injunction is already in operation against the petitioner, explicitly restraining him from erecting a fence on the property. This legal restraint further complicates the situation, as any attempt to proceed with phodi or related processes would be in direct conflict with the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:2169 WP No. 228 of 2025 ongoing legal proceedings and the existing injunction. Allowing such measures would not only contravene the terms of the injunction but also potentially prejudice the outcome of the suit. In light of these considerations, the authorities were justified in issuing the impugned endorsement, as it aligns with the principles of judicial propriety and ensures that the status quo of the suit property is maintained until the suit's resolution. Consequently, there is no justification for this Court to interfere with the impugned endorsement. 4. However, this order will not come in the way of the petitioner to seek appropriate relief relating to survey and durasti after disposal of the suit or after seeking vacation of the injunction order granted by the civil Court. 5. The writ petition is devoid of merits and accordingly, stands dismissed. SD/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE ALB, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 30