- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:11757 WP No. 64761 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 64761 OF 2016 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. N. PREMAKUMAR S/O LATE M NEELAPPA, DEAD BY HIS LRs., 1(a) SMT. GEETHA PREMKUMAR., W/O LATE N.PREMAKUMAR., AGED 56 YERS, R/AT VEERAPURA VILLAGE, GAJANURU POST, NIDIGE HOBLI, SHIVAMOGGA TALUK AND DIST-577 201. 1(b) LAVANYA.P.G. D/O LATE N.PREMAKUMAR., W/O CHETHAN.D.K, AGED 31 YEARS, R/AT No.A1602, BRIGADE PANORAMA, KAMBIPURA, ACHE PALYA, OPP. RR ENGINEERING COLLEGE, MYSORE ROAD, BENGALURU-560 074. 1(c) KANCHANA.P.G., D/O LATE N.PREMAKUMAR, W/O AKSHAYAKUMAR., AGED 30 YEARS, R/AT No.F3/4, UTP QUARTERS KARNATAKA NEERAVARI NIGAMA, OPP.ASHOKA GRAND HOTEL, SAGAR ROAD, SHIVAMOGGA-577 201. 1(d) SMT. RACHANA.P.G., Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:11757 WP No. 64761 of 2016 D/O LATE N.PREMAKUMAR., W/O SRINIVAS.K.R., AGED 29 YEARS, R/AT No.22, 3RD FLOOR, BHADRA BUILDING, NEW POLICE APARTMENT, P.J.EXTENSION, DAVANAGERE-577 002. 1(e) GAGANKUMAR.P.G, S/O LATE N.PREMAKUMAR, AGED 26 YEARS, R/AT VEERAPURA VILLAGE, GAJANURU POST, NIDIGE HOBLI, SHIVAMOGGA TALUK AND DIST-577201. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. CHANDRASHEKAR., ADVOCATE FOR LRs., OF DECEASED PETITIONER) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT, SHIVAMOGGA-577 201. 2. THE ASST COMMISSIONER SHIVAMOGGA SUB DIVISION, SHIVAMOGGA-577 201. 3. THE TAHSILDAR SHIVAMOGGA TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA-577 201. 4. SMT GOWRAMMA W/O LATE BASAIAH, AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS R/AT VEERAPURA VILLAGE, GAJANUR, SHIVAMOGGA TALUK-577 201. 5. SMT DAKSHAYANI W/O C R PANDITHARADYA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS BOTH ARE R/AT VEERAPURA VILLAGE, - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:11757 WP No. 64761 of 2016 GAJANUR, SHIVAMOGGA TALUK-577 201 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SAVITHRAMMA., AGA FOR R-1 TO R-3; SRI. LAKSHMIKANTH.K., ADVOCATE FOR R-4 & R-5) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS FROM THE R-1 TO 4 AND QUASH THE ORDER DATED:30.8.2016 PASSED BY THE R-1 MADE IN CASE NO.R MISC 67/2011-12 VIDE ANNEXURE-H, ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA ORAL ORDER 1. An order of mutation made in favour of respondent No.4/Gowramma in M.R. No.1/2001-02 was challenged by the petitioner by preferring an appeal under Section 136(2) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 (for short, 'the Act') to the Assistant Commissioner. 2. The Assistant Commissioner after considering the matter in detail came to the conclusion that the land bearing Sy.No.26 measuring 03 acres 18 guntas which is the subject of M.R. No.1/2001-02 had - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:11757 WP No. 64761 of 2016 actually been acquired by the State for the Tunga and Bhadra Project and therefore, the registration of Khata in favour of Gowramma was incorrect and accordingly set aside the mutation made in her favour. 3. Being aggrieved, a revision was filed to the Deputy Commissioner by Gowramma and Dakshayini. 4. The Deputy Commissioner has allowed the revision principally on the ground that the Assistant Commissioner who had passed the order under Section 136(2) of the Act was also the Special Land Acquisition Officer and she had issued an endorsement stating that the land at dispute had not been acquired and the Deputy Commissioner therefore set aside the order of the Assistant Commissioner and directed the Khata to be restored in favour of Gowramma and Dakshayini. 5. Being aggrieved by this order, the present writ petition has been filed. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:11757 WP No. 64761 of 2016 6. The learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the fact that the lands are acquired is not in dispute at all. He points out that an award was passed for Rs.1,380-76 and the said sum was also received by the Khatedar and therefore, the continuance of the name of any individual would be incorrect. 7. He also points out that Gowramma and Dakshayini had instituted a suit in O.S. No.108 of 2011 seeking for declaration and the said suit was also dismissed on 06.12.2014 and this dismissal has not been challenged, which by itself establishes that Gowramma and Dakshayini have no right over the land. 8. In my view, having regard to the fact that the lands were acquired and an award was passed, which is also received by the Khatedar, the question of the Khata being entered in the name of any individual would not arise. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:11757 WP No. 64761 of 2016 9. The reasoning of the Deputy Commissioner that the Special Land Acquisition Officer had issued an endorsed stating that the land was not acquired is an improper reasoning, more so when he does not dispute the fact that the lands in question had in fact been acquired. 10. Further, the fact that the suit for declaration filed by Gowramma was dismissed and the same has not been challenged, she would be disentitled to seek for registration of Khata in her favour. 11. Consequently, the impugned order is set aside and the order of the Assistant Commissioner is restored. 12. The writ petition is accordingly allowed. Sd/- (N S SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE RK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 54