- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:14308 WP No. 1678 of 2025 C/W WP No. 1006 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 1678 OF 2025 (KLR-RES) C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 1006 OF 2025 (KLR-RES) IN WP No. 1678/2025 BETWEEN: 1. SMT. SHABANA W/O ABBUBAKKAR, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, R/AT DOOR NO.4-6-550/2, AKSHAYA APARTMENTS, KARANGALPADI,KODIALBAILU, MANGALURU, D.K DISTRICT -575 003. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAJASHEKAR S.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDING, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560 001, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE BUNDER, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT, MANGALURU-575 001. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER AND SUB-DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE ATTAVAR, MANGALURU, Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:14308 WP No. 1678 of 2025 C/W WP No. 1006 of 2025 DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT-575 001. 4. THE TAHSILDAR MANGALURU TALUK, MAIDAN ROAD, BHAVATHI, BUNDER, MANGALURU, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT-575 001. 5. DADA RICE FLOUR AND OIL MILLS PRIVATE LIMTED, A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE INDIAN COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING ITS OFFICE AT DADA RICE FLOUR BUILDING, KAVOORU, DEREBAILU VILLAGE, MANGALURU, D.K. DISTRICT-575 006, REP. BY ONE OF ITS DIRECTORS. 6. M.D. USMAN S/O D. AHMED SAB, AGED ABOUT YEARS, R/AT HOSANAGARA TOWN. SHIVAMOGGA-577 418. 7. KARAMATHULLA SAIT S/O. LATE SULEIMAN SAIT, AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS, 8. K. KASEEM SAIT S/O. LATE SULEIMAN SAIT, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, 9. IQBAL SULEIMAN SAIT S/O. LATE SULEIMAN SAIT, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, 10. SMT. THAHIRA BANU W/O. LATE K. REHEMATHULLA SAIT, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, 11. MOHAMMED ASHFAN SAIT @ NAWAZ S/O. LATE K. REHEMATHULLA SAIT, - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:14308 WP No. 1678 of 2025 C/W WP No. 1006 of 2025 AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, 12. MOHAMMED PARVEZ SAIT S/O. LATE K. REHEMATHULLA SAIT, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, RESPONDENTS NOS.7 TO 12 ARE R/AT SAIT MANSION, KABETTU., CHOLPADY, KARKALA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT-574 104. 13. SRI DEVI RANGHAVENDRA NAYAK FAMILY FOUNDATION, A REGISTERED PRIVATE TRUST HAVING ITS OFFICE AND BUSINESS AT NO.23/18, 2ND MAIN ROAD, P.M. BASAPPA LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560 019. REP. BY ONE OF ITS TRUSTEES KONI GANAPATHY NAYAK AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS. 14. KONI GANAPATHY NAYAK, S/O LATE KONI RAGHAVENDRA NAYAK AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS 15. KONI NAVINCHANDRA NAYAK S/O KONI GANAPATHY NAYAK AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS 16. KONI SANJAY NAYAK S/O KONI GANAPATHY NAYAK AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS RESPONDENT NOS. 13 TO 16 ARE R/AT NO.23/18, 2ND MAIN ROAD, P.M. BASAPPA LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560 019. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.K MANJUNATH., HCGP FOR R1 TO R4, SRI. P.P. HEGDE., SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI.VENKATESH SOMAREDDI.,ADVOCATE FOR R6, SRI. S.R. KAMALACHARAN, ADVOCATE FOR C/R13 TO C/R16) - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:14308 WP No. 1678 of 2025 C/W WP No. 1006 of 2025 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 17/12/2024 PASSED BY R2 IN REVISION PETITION NO. CDS.R.A.P.98/2023 ALLOWING THE REVISION PETITION FILED BY THE R13 TO R16 VIDE ANNEXURE-A. IN WP NO. 1006/2025 BETWEEN: 1. M D USMAN S/O D AHMED SAB, AGED 54 YEARS, R/AT HOSANAGARA TOWN, SHIVAMOGGA-577 418. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. P.P. HEGDE, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI.VENKATESH SOMAREDDI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY VIDHANA SOUDA, BENGALURU-560 001. 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT, MANGALORE-575 001. 3. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER MANGALURU DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT- 575 001. 4. SRI DEVI RAGHAVENDRA NAYAK FAMILY FOUNDATION, A REGISTERED PRIVATE TRUST HAVING ITS OFFICE AND BUSINESS AT NO 23/18, 2ND MAIN ROAD, PM BASAPPA LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560 019. REPRESENTED BY ITS ONE OF HIS TRUSTEES, SRI KONI GANAPATHY NAYAK. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:14308 WP No. 1678 of 2025 C/W WP No. 1006 of 2025 5. MR.KONI GANAPATHI NAYAK, S/O LATE KONI RAGHAVENDRA NAYAK, AGED MAJOR, 6. MR. KONI NAVEEN CHANDRA NAYAK S/O LATE GANAPTHI NAYAK AGED MAJOR, 7. MR. KONI SANJAY NAYAK AGED MAJOR, LATE GANAPATHI NAYAK RESPONDENT NO.5 TO 7 ARE RESIDING AT NO 23/18, 2ND MAIN ROAD, PM BASAPPA LAYOUT BENGALURU-560 019. 8. MRS. SHABANA W/O ABUBAKKER, AGED MAJOR, DOOR NO.4-6-550/2, AKSHAY APARTMENTS KARANGALPADY KODIALBAIL, MANGALURU- 575 001. 9. SRI. KARMATHULLA AGED MAJOR, S/O LATE SULEIMAN SAIT 10. K KASEEM SAIT AGED MAJOR, S/O LATE SULEIMAN SAIT 11. IQBAL SULEIMAN SAIT S/O LATE SULEIMAN SAIT AGED MAJOR, 12. SMT TAHIRA BANU W/O LATE K REHEMATHULLA AGED MAJOR, 13. MOHAMMED ASHFAN SAIT ALIAS NAWAZ S/O LATE K REHEMATHULLA SAIT AGED MAJOR, - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:14308 WP No. 1678 of 2025 C/W WP No. 1006 of 2025 14. MOHAMMED PARVEZ SAIT S/O LATE K REHEMATHULLA SAIT AGED MAJOR, RESPONDENT NO.9 TO 14 ARE RESIDING AT SAIT MANSION, KABETTU CHOLPADY, KARKALA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT- 574 104. 15. [ 16. DADA RICE FLOUR AND OIL MILLS PVT. LTD REGISTERED UNDER COMPANIES ACT, 1956, OFFICE AT DADA RICE FLOUR BUILDING, KAVOOR, DEREBAILU, MANGALORE- 575 006. TAHSILDAR MANGALORE TALUK MANGALORE DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT- 575 001. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.K MANJUNATH., HCGP FOR R1 TO R3, SRI. S.R. KAMALACHARAN, ADVOCATE FOR C/R4 TO R7, SRI. S RAJASHEKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R8) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DTD. 17.12.2024 PASSED IN CDS RAP 98/2023 BY DEPUTY COMMISSIONER / R-2 HEREIN VIDE ANNX-F. THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:14308 WP No. 1678 of 2025 C/W WP No. 1006 of 2025 ORAL ORDER 1. The dispute in this case relates to the entry of the name of the Khatedar in respect of the property bearing Sy.No.106/1AP2 measuring 4 acre 83 cents. 2. It is not in dispute that on the basis of R.R.No.698, the name of Dada Rice Floor and Oil Mills was entered in the Revenue Records. It is also admitted by all the learned counsels that this entry in favor of the Dada Rice Floor and Oil Mills was made on the basis of three Registered Sale Deeds in year 1962. 3. On 21.03.1992, a mutation was made in respect of the aforementioned survey number. The extract of the Mutation Register reads as follows: 432/91-92 1836 £Éà SÁvÉ 21/03/92 3357 106-1 4-83 gÁWÀªÉÃAzÀæ JAl¥ÉæöÊð¸À¸ï EªÁæ¥ÀgÀªÁV £ÀUÀgÀ £ÁgÁAiÀÄt ªÀQîgÀÄ qÉÆAUÀgÀPÉÃj DzÉñÀ £ÉÆÃn¸ï eÁjAiÀiÁVzÉ DPÉëÃ¥À §A¢gÀĪÀÅ¢®è ªÀÄAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ 18-3-92gÀ DzÉñÀzÀ C£ÀéAiÀÄ ¸ÀªÉÃð £ÀA§gï 106-1 4-83 JPÀgÉ ¸ÀܼÀªÀ£ÀÄß SÁvÁ £ÀA§gï 695jAzÀ ªÀeÁ ªÀÄr ²æÃzÉë gÁWÀªÉÃAzÀæ £ÁAiÀÄPï ¥sÁå«Ä° ¥sËAqÉñÀ£ï ¥ÉæöʪÉÃmï - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:14308 WP No. 1678 of 2025 C/W WP No. 1006 of 2025 °«ÄmÉqï jf¸ÀÖqïð læ¸ïÖ ²æà UÀt¥Àw £ÁAiÀÄÌ CªÀgÀ ºÉ¸ÀjUÉ ºÉƸÀ SÁvÉ ¥ÀºÀt PÉÆqÀĪÀÅzÀgÀ §UÉÎ. 4. As could be seen from the above, the revenue entries were mutated in favour of Raghavendra Enterprises on the basis of an order of the Tahsildar dated 18.03.1992. 5. This order of mutation in M.R.No.432/1991-92 was challenged by Dada Rice Floor and Oil Mills Private Limited by its purported owner, M.D. Usman. This order was also challenged by Shabana, daughter of Jeenam Dawood. 6. The Assistant Commissioner after hearing the parties concerned came to the conclusion that the records did not contain the order of the Tahsildar dated 18.03.1992 on the basis of which mutation that had been made and, therefore, the said M.R.No.432/1991-92 could not be sustained. He accordingly set aside the said mutation and directed - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:14308 WP No. 1678 of 2025 C/W WP No. 1006 of 2025 the khata to be restored prior to the said M.R.No.432/1991-92. 7. Being aggrieved by this order, respondent Nos.4 to 7 preferred a revision. The Deputy Commissioner by the impugned order has set aside the order of the Assistant Commissioner and directed the restoration of the entries pursuant to M.R.No.432/91-92. 8. Being aggrieved by this order of the Deputy Commissioner, M.D.Usman has filed W.P.No.1006/2025 in his individual capacity and Smt.Shabana has filed W.P.No.1678/2025. 9. The learned Senior counsel appearing for M.D.Usman and the learned counsel appearing for Smt.Shabana contends that when the entire basis of the mutation was the order of the Tahsildar dated 18.03.1992 was not in existence at all, the question of sustaining M.R.No.432/1991-92 would not rise. - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC:14308 WP No. 1678 of 2025 C/W WP No. 1006 of 2025 10. Sri.S.R.Kamalacharan, learned counsel on the other hand contends that there have been several transactions between various entities which is ultimately resulted in the property coming into the hands of respondent Nos.4 to 7 and, therefore, the order of Deputy Commissioner cannot be sustained. 11. It is to be noticed, at the outset, that an order of mutation can be affected only on the basis of an order of the Tahsildar, which, in turn, would be based on acquisition of rights in a manner known to law. 12. Admittedly, in the instant case, the only basis for M.R.No.432/1991-92 is the order of Tahsildar dated 18.03.1992. However, this order is admittedly not found in the file. Even the Deputy Commissioner does not state in his order that the order of the Tahsildar dated 18.03.1992 exists in the file. In the light of the indisputable fact that there is no such order of the Tahsildar dated 18.03.1992, the decision - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC:14308 WP No. 1678 of 2025 C/W WP No. 1006 of 2025 of the Assistant Commissioner in setting aside M.R.No.432/1991-92 may not be found fault with. 13. The Deputy Commissioner has not even considered this aspect of the matter and has merely allowed the revision on several factors which are not really relevant. 14. In that view of the matter, in my view, the order the Deputy Commissioner cannot be sustained and the same is quashed and the order of the Assistant Commissioner is restored. As a consequence, the revenue entries, as it stood prior to the passing of M.R.No.432/91-92 shall stand restored. 15. It is however open to the parties before this Court to approach a competent Civil Court and established that they are the owners of the property in question and, if such a decree is obtained by them, it is needless to state that revenue entries would abide with the result of such a decree. - 12 - NC: 2025:KHC:14308 WP No. 1678 of 2025 C/W WP No. 1006 of 2025 16. Subject to the above, this writ petition is allowed. 17. It is needless to state that the Tahsildar shall give effect to the order of the Assistant Commissioner and shall restore the names as it stood prior to M.R.No.432/91-92 within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. 18. 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.: 9