- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:4316 WP No. 2387 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 2387 OF 2025 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: V R KESHAVA REDDY S/O LATE V RAMA REDDY AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS R/AT NANGLI VILLAGE AND POST BYRAKUR HOBLI, MULBAGAL TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT 563132 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. CHANDRASHEKARA REDDY M V., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT M S BUILDINGS BENGAURU 560 001 REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY 2. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER TALUKA PANCHAYAT MULBAGAL TALUK MULBAGAL KOLAR DISTRICT 563131 3. THE PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER NANGLI VILLAGE PANCHAYAT NANGLI Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:4316 WP No. 2387 of 2025 MULBAGAL TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT 563132 4. N K MATHINULLA S/O N S KALILULLA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS NANGLI VILLAGE AND POST BYRAKUR HOBLI MULBAGAL TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT 563132 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAHUL CARIAPPA, AGA FOR R1) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR ENTIRE RECORDS ON THE FILE OF THE R-2 IN V.P.A NO. 04/2022-23 AND ON PERUSAL GRANT THE FOLLOWING RELIEFS. QUASH THE ORDER DTD. 19.08.2024 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO. 2 IN VPA NO. 4/2022-23 AS PER ANNX-A CONSEQUENTLY. ALLOW THE SAID APPEAL IN VPA NO. 04/2022-23 FILED BY THE PETITIONER AS PRAYED FOR. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA ORAL ORDER 1. A challenge was made to the khatha registered in the name of respondent no.4 and this challenge has been negatived by the Executive Officer under the impugned order dated 19.08.2024. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:4316 WP No. 2387 of 2025 2. In the impugned order, the Executive Officer has noted that respondent no.4 herein had in fact instituted a suit in O.S.No.111/2020 against the petitioner and the said suit which had been filed for a decree of perpetual injunction was decreed in favour of respondent no.4, and therefore, there was no justification for disturbing the khatha entered in his name. 3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner also does not dispute the fact that petitioner has himself instituted a suit in O.S.No.514/2023, which is a comprehensive suit, in which petitioner has sought for a declaration that he is the owner of the property in respect of which, khatha has been registered in the name of respondent no.4. 4. In my view, in light of the fact that respondent no.4 has a decree of injunction in his favour and keeping in mind that the petitioner has himself instituted a suit for declaration, there is no justification for interfering with the order passed by the Executive Officer. It is also to be - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:4316 WP No. 2387 of 2025 noticed here that admittedly the khatha has been registered in the name of respondent no.4 way back in the year 2006 and has been subsisting for the past nearly 18 years. There is, therefore, no merit in this writ petition. Petition is dismissed. 5. However, it is made clear that the panchayat authorities will be bound to abide by the result of O.S.No.514/2023 which is filed by the petitioner seeking for a declaration. Sd/- (N S SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE KK