- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:4719 WP No. 1050 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO.1050 OF 2025 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI GOPALAPPA S/O BEERAPPA AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS RESIDING AT CT GOLLAHALLI VILLAGE NANDAGUDI HOBLI HOSAKOTE TALUK BENGALURU - 562 122 2. CHIKKASAMPANNA S/O MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS RESIDING AT CT GOLLAHALLI VILLAGE NANDAGUDI HOBLI HOSAKOTE TALUK BENGALURU - 562 122 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI.SHRIKANTA SHARMA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT BENGALURU - 572 110 Digitally signed by AL BHAGYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:4719 WP No. 1050 of 2025 2. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER DODDABALLAPURA SUB-DIVISION BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT BENGALURU - 572110 3. TAHASILDAR HOSKOTE TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT BENGALURU - 572110 4. KRISHNAPPA S/O LATE MUNISHAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS 5. MUNIRAJAPPA S/O LATE DODDAMADAPPA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS 6. MUNIYAPPA S/O LATE DODDAMADAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS 7. NARAYANASWAMY S/O LATE DODDAMADAPPA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS 8. MUNIRAJAPPA S/O LATE PILLAPPA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS 9. NANDEESHA S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS 10. LAKSHMAMMA D/O LATE SAMPANNA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:4719 WP No. 1050 of 2025 RESPONDENT NOS.4 TO 10 ARE RESIDING AT C.T.GOLLAHALLI VILLAGE NANDAGUDI HOBLI HOSAKOTE TALUK BANGALORE - 562123 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.MANJUNATH K, HCGP FOR R.1 TO 3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY R1 IN RP NO.156/2023 DATED 14/11/2024 AND ORDER PASSED BY R2 ORDER IN R.A.(O)20/2020-21 DATED 27/07/2023 AT ANN-A AND B RESPECTIVELY AND ETC. 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 This writ petition is filed by the legal heirs of the original grantee namely Bandaiah assailing the orders of respondent No.2 – Assistant Commissioner and respondent No.1 – Deputy Commissioner. 2. The subject matter of this petition is an agricultural land bearing Sy. No.47 (New Sy. No.92) totally measuring 4 acres 4 guntas situated at C.T.Gollahalli - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:4719 WP No. 1050 of 2025 Village, Nandagudi Hobli, Hoskote Taluk. The petitioners, who are legal heirs of the original grantee – Bandaiah, along with respondent Nos.5 to 10 appears to have got their names mutated based on the partition and mutation came to be effected. In the said partition, the petitioners have included the entire extent measuring 4 acres 4 guntas. The said mutation was challenged by the private respondents. Respondent No.2 - Assistant Commissioner taking cognizance of 1947 sale deed executed by the petitioner’s grandfather set-aside the mutation, which was confirmed by respondent No.1 - Deputy Commissioner. 3. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned HCGP. 4. On closer examination of the statement made by the petitioners in the captioned writ petition, it is clearly evident that the petitioners’ grandfather sold 1 acre of land in Sy. No.47 under registered sale deed dated 04.09.1947 in favour of one Munishamappa. However, the present petitioners, who are grandchildren of the original - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:4719 WP No. 1050 of 2025 grantee, while effecting partition have cleverly included even 1 acre of land, which was alienated way back in 1947. Therefore, respondent No.2-Assistant Commissioner and respondent No.1-Deputy Commissioner taking cognizance of this alienation effected in 1947 have rightly set-aside the impugned mutation bearing M.R.T9/1998-99, M.R.10/98-99, M.R.H.27/16-17, M.R.H.08/2019-20 and M.R.T.13/2022-23. 5. This Court, while reviewing the materials which are placed on record, is more than satisfied that the petitioners’ family has retained only 3 acres 4 guntas. If the original grantee has sold 1 acre in 1947, the petitioners cannot lay a claim and include alienated portion measuring 1 acre by way of family partition and then assert title. This factual matrix is rightly adverted by respondent No.2 - Assistant Commissioner and respondent No.1 - Deputy Commissioner. 6. The petitioners assert that they are in possession and therefore, they are entitled to include 1 acre in the - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:4719 WP No. 1050 of 2025 family partition is totally misconceived. This Court is not inclined to examine the possessory rights of the parties in the mutation proceedings under Sections 128 and 129 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act. The writ petition is devoid of merits and accordingly, stands dismissed. SD/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE NBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 53