- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:17880 WP No. 10857 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 10857 OF 2022 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. NAGESH S/O LATE JAVAREGOWDA AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS 2. LAKSHMAMMA W/O NAGESH AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS BOTH ARE R/A B. HOSURU VILLAGE KEREGODU HOBLI MANDYA TALUK-571 446. 3. H.N. RENUKA D/O NAGESH AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS R/A YELECHAKANAHALLI KOTHATHI HOBLI MANDYA TALUK-571402. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. H.C. SHIVARAMU, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU-560001. Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:17880 WP No. 10857 of 2022 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER MANDYA DISTRICT MANDYA-571401. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER MANDYA SUB DIVISION MANDYA-571401. 4. TAHSILDAR MANDYA TALUK MANDYA-571401. 5. REVENUE INSPECTOR KEREGODU 1ST CIRCLE MANDYA-571401. 6. H.K. SHIVAKUMAR S/O KALAIAH AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS R/A B. HOSURU, KEREGODU HOBLI MANDYA TALUK-571446. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SAVITHRAMMA, AGA FOR R1 TO R5; SRI. JNANESH KUMAR .K, ADVOCATE FOR R6) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 25.03.2022 PASSED IN R.P.NO.19/2019 BY THE R-2 VIDE ANNXURE-A AND CONSEQUENTLY DISMISS THE SAME IN TO AND THEREBY CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE R3 PASSED IN R.MISC.NO.451/2015 DATED 17.12.2018 VIDE ANNEXURE-C. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:17880 WP No. 10857 of 2022 ORAL ORDER 1. An order of mutation made vide M.R.Nos.170 of 1998-99 and 301 of 1998-99 was challenged before the Assistant Commissioner on the ground that the khata had been registered under those MRs by consent. 2. It is contended that since there was no acquisition of title as permissible in law, the revenue entries could not be mutated. 3. The Assistant Commissioner accepted this plea and allowed the appeal and set aside the orders of mutation made vide M.R. Nos.170 of 1998-99 and 301 of 1998-99. 4. This order has however been reversed by the Deputy Commissioner. The Deputy Commissioner has not recorded in his order that M.R. Nos.301 of 1998-99 and 170 of 1998-99 were on the basis of any documents by which title stood conveyed to the revisional petitioner. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:17880 WP No. 10857 of 2022 5. Merely because there is an order of mutation, that would not entitle the revision petitioner to get his name entered, unless he establishes that he had acquired title, on the basis of which the revenue entries were required to be mutated in his favour. 6. Since admittedly there is no document on the basis of which M.R. Nos.301 of 1998-99 and 170 of 1998- 99 have been incorporated in the revenue records, the same cannot be sustained. 7. Consequently, the order of the Deputy Commissioner is set aside and the order of the Assistant Commissioner shall stand restored. 8. This order shall however not come in the way of respondent No.6 to initiate appropriate proceedings before the Civil Court and secure an appropriate declaratory decree regarding his entitlement over the land in question. If such a decree is obtained, the entries will stand mutated accordingly. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:17880 WP No. 10857 of 2022 9. If the revenue entries are mutated pursuant to the order of the Deputy Commissioner, the same shall be deleted and the entries as it stood after the order of the Assistant Commissioner shall stand restored. 10. The writ petition is accordingly allowed. 11. In view of the disposal of the petition, all the pending interlocutory application, if any, stand disposed of. Sd/- (N S SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE RK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 70