- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:17566 WP No. 34502 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 34502 OF 2017 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: SMT. MANGALA BABU DHAMMANAGI W/O BABU ADIVEPA DHAMMANGI AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS R/O NO.137, RAILWAY PARALLEL ROAD KUMARA PARK WEST BANGALORE-560 020. REP BY GPA HOLDER MR. BABU DHAMMANAGI AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS …PETITIONER (BY SRI. G.S. KANNUR, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI. D.M. NATARAJA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU DISTRICT, K G ROAD BENGALURU-560 001. 2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS BANGALORE DIVISION BENGALURU-560 001. 3. THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS BANGALORE SUB-DIVISION BENGALURU-560 001. Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:17566 WP No. 34502 of 2017 4. SMT. B.K. KRISHNAVENI W/O M. NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS R/O NO.25, 2ND STAGE 2ND CROSS, INDIRANAGAR BANGALORE-560 038. 5. A.P. KRISHNAPPA MAJOR R/O NO.45, NAVARATHANA AGRAHARA VILLAGE JALAHOBLI, SADAHLLI POST BANGALORE NORTH TALUK BANGALORE-562 157. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S.A. AHMED, ADDL. ADVOCATE GENERAL A/W SMT. SAVITHRAMMA, AGA FOR R1 TO R3; V/O DATED 30.1.2024, WP AGAINST R4 IS ABATED AND NOTICE TO LRs OF R4 IS DISPENSED WITH; SRI. CHITHAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR R5) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 10.5.2017 PASSED BY THE R-1 IN R.P.NO.15/2013-15 VIDE ANNEXURE-M AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING ‘B’, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:17566 WP No. 34502 of 2017 ORAL ORDER 1. This writ petition is filed challenging the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner in the revision that had been filed under Section 56 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 (for short, ‘the Act’). 2. The revision petition had been directed against the hissa-phodi of the land bearing Sy.No.3 whereby the said land was surveyed and a new survey number had been assigned. 3. The Deputy Commissioner had refused to entertain the revision on the ground that the hissa phodi of the year 1980 was sought to be challenged and it was impermissible for the hissa phodi to be examined after 44 years. 4. In my view, this reasoning of the Deputy Commissioner cannot be found fault with. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:17566 WP No. 34502 of 2017 5. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner however submits that the petitioner is not concerned with the entire extent of Sy.No.3, which measures totally about 187 acres, but his only dispute is with regard to the land that the petitioner had purchased vis-à-vis the land that had been purchased by respondent No.5. 6. In light of this submission, if the petitioner was to give a request to the authorities to conduct a survey, haddubast and phodi in respect of the land that he had purchased and in respect of the land claimed by respondent No.5, the authority shall consider the said application and pass an appropriate order in accordance with law, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of such an application. 7. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:17566 WP No. 34502 of 2017 8. 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.: 119