- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:16907 WP No. 32368 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 32368 OF 2016 (KLR-RR/SUR) BETWEEN: M. NAGENDRAPPA S/O SIDDAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS R/AT KUNIBELAKERE VILLAGE HARIHARA TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT - 570 001. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. S.B. HALLI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE SECRETARY MINISTRY TO REVENUE DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DAVANGERE DISTRCT, DAVANGERE - 577 001. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER DAVANGERE SUB DIVISION DAVANGERE - 577 001. 4. THE TAHSILDAR Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:16907 WP No. 32368 of 2016 HONNALI TALUK, HONNALI DAVANGERE DISTRICT - 577 217. 5. RAMAPPA S/O SIDDAPPA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS KALAGHATTE VILLAGE HONNALI TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT - 577 217. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SAVITHRAMMA, AGA FOR R1 TO R4; SRI. RAMAKRISHNA .N, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. M.R. HIREMATHAD, ADVOCATE FOR R5) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 06.03.2015 IN NO. RA/CR-55/2013- 14 PASSED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT (R-2) (ANNEXURE-E) AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA ORAL ORDER 1. Gangamma, who described herself as Gangamma daughter of Siddappa, purchased the lands bearing Sy.Nos.47/2 and 48/3 under a registered sale deed dated 26.07.2005 from her father Siddappa. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:16907 WP No. 32368 of 2016 Pursuant to this sale deed, the revenue entries were mutated in her favor vide M.R. No.5/2005-06. 2. The petitioner—M.Nagedrappa contends that he married Gangamma in the year 2008 and she passed away on 17.01.2010 and the same is evidenced by a death certificate, which is produced at Annexure ‘C’. 3. It is also pointed out that in this death certificate, it is clearly recorded that the husband of Badajji Gangamma was Nagendrappa i.e., the petitioner and therefore, it is his contention that on the death of Gangamma, his name was required to be entered in the revenue records. 4. Since the Tahsildar had refused to enter his name, Nagendrappa, the petitioner preferred an appeal to the Assistant commissioner, who accepted the appeal and directed the revenue entries were to be mutated in favour of the petitioner—Nagendrappa. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:16907 WP No. 32368 of 2016 5. However, a revision was filed by Ramappa contending that Gangamma—the khatedar was his sister and she was unmarried and therefore, the revenue entries were required to be mutated in his favour. 6. This revision has been accepted by the Deputy Commissioner in part and it is stated in the order that the revenue entries were required to be mutated jointly in favour of Nagendrappa, the petitioner and Ramappa, who contended that he is the brother of Gangamma. 7. The Deputy Commissioner has opined that as per Section 15(2) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (for short, ‘the Act’), both of them had inherited the property jointly. 8. Being aggrieved by this order, the present writ petition is filed. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:16907 WP No. 32368 of 2016 9. As already stated above, it is the case of the petitioner that he is the husband of Gangamma, who was admittedly the Khatedar. He states that after Gangamma passed away in the year 2010, apart from him, nobody else could succeed to the property by virtue of his marital relationship with Gangamma. 10. But the brother of Gangamma had set up a claim that he was also entitled for inheriting the property. Ramappa, the brother of Gangamma in fact went on to deny the very marriage of Gangamma and therefore, insisted that only he had inherited the property. 11. At the outset, it is to be stated here that the revenue authorities would be incompetent to decide on the relationship of the Khatedar with the persons who were claiming to have inherited the property. The revenue authorities are bound to go by the documents that are produced before them to establish as to who had succeeded to the property. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:16907 WP No. 32368 of 2016 12. In this case, the Assistant Commissioner had found that the petitioner was the husband of Gangamma and therefore, the khata was required to be registered in his name. 13. However, the Deputy Commissioner has taken a rather strange view that the khata should be registered jointly in the name of Nagendrappa—the petitioner and also the brother of Gangamma and reliance is placed on Section 15(2) of the Act. 14. This is obviously an error. If the khatedar had left behind her a surviving spouse and children, in law, it is only the spouse and the children who would be entitled to succeed to the property. 15. It is to be stated here that the death certificate that is produced of Gangamma, indicates that her husband was Nagendrappa, i.e., the petitioner. 16. In that view of the matter, the order of the Assistant Commissioner would have to be accepted and the - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:16907 WP No. 32368 of 2016 order of the Deputy Commissioner will have to be reversed. 17. Consequently, the order of the Deputy Commissioner is set aside and the order of the Assistant Commissioner is restored. 18. The revenue authority shall enter the name only of Nagendrappa i.e., the petitioner herein, in the revenue records as the successor-in-interest of Gangamma. 19. However, this order will not come in the way of the brother of Gangamma i.e., Ramappa to approach the Civil Court and establish that Nagendrappa was not the husband of Gangamma and Gangamma had died without getting married. 20. If such a declaration is obtained, it is needless to state that the revenue entries will have to abide by the result of such a decree. 21. The Writ Petition is accordingly allowed. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:16907 WP No. 32368 of 2016 22. In view of the disposal of the petition, all pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of. Sd/- (N S SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE RK/- List No.: 1 Sl No.: 90