- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23134 WP NO.8609 OF 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.8609 OF 2022 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: SHRI. PRAKASH ACHARYA S/O LATE RAGHAVENDRA ACHARYA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/AT NEAR NANDAVARA MASJID, SAJIPA MUNNOR VILLAGE, BANTWAL TALUK, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 574 219. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAVISHANKAR SHASTRY G., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT MANGALURU, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRAICT - 575 001. 2. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER MANGALURU SUB-DIVISION, MANGALURU, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 575 001. 3. TAHSILDAR BANTWAL TALUK, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 574 219. 4. REVENUE INSPECTOR NADAKACHERI, BANTWAL TALUK, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 574 219. Digitally signed by SHARMA ANAND CHAYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23134 WP NO.8609 OF 2022 5. SHRI. BHASKAR ACHARYA S/O CHANDRAYA ACHARYA, AGED ABOUT 79 YEARS, R/AT THREEVERI CHAR COP, CUP DIVILI (WEST), MUMBAI - 400 067. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MANJUNATH K., HCGP FOR R1 TO R4; SRI. A. MADHUSUDHANA RAO, ADVOCTE FOR R5) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 14TH SEPTEMBER, 2021 PASSED BY THE RESPONDNET NO.1-DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT, IN CASE NO. C.DIS.R.A.P.109/2017-18 VIDE ANNEXURE-A; QUASH THE ORDER DATED 22ND AUGUST, 2017 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2-ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, MANGALURU SUB-DIVISION IN CASE NO. C.DIS:RRT:SR:42/2009-10 VIDE ANNEXURE-B; AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH ORAL ORDER In this writ petition, the petitioner is assailing the order dated 14th September, 2021 (Annexure-A) passed by the respondent No.1 in Case No.C.DIS.R.A.P.109/2017-18 and - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23134 WP NO.8609 OF 2022 order dated 22nd August, 2017 (Annexure-B) passed by the respondent No.2 in Case No.C.DIS:RRT:SR:42/2009-10. 2. Heard Sri. Ravishankar Shastry G., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner; Sri. Manjunath K., learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 4; and Sri. A. Madhusudhana Rao, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.5. 3. In the light of submission made by learned counsel appearing for the parties, the claim made by the petitioner is that the father of the petitioner had purchased the land in question as per the registered Sale Deed dated 09th October, 1957 and thereafter, the registered partition deed has been effected in respect of the joint family properties including the land in question as per the registered Partition Deed dated 27th August, 1962. In that view of the matter, taking into consideration the fact that the land in question is the subject matter in Original Suit No.20 of 2020 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC., Bantwal, which is filed questioning the above said partition deed, I am of the view that the parties to the proceedings have to await the decision in the above suit. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23134 WP NO.8609 OF 2022 Therefore, I do not find any merit in the writ petition to interfere with the impugned orders passed by the respondent- Authorities. Accordingly, writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- (E.S. INDIRESH) JUDGE ARK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 60