- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:15591 WP No. 12154 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 12154 OF 2022 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI ANJANAPPA S/O SUBBAIAH, AGED 50 YEARS OCCUPATION AGRICULTURIST HESARGHATTA HOBLI BENGALURU NORTH TALUK BENGALURU DISTRICT 560089 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. UMESH MOOLIMANI., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI RAMAKRISHNAPPA S/O LT MUNISWAMAPPA AGED 59 YEARS OCCUPATION: AGRICUTLURIST R/AT ITAGALPURA VILALGE HESARGHATTA HOBLI BENGALURU NORTH TALUK BENGALURU DISTRICT 560089 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU DISTRCIT BENGAULRU 560009 3. MUNIKEMPAIAH, S/O PATELAPPA AGED 45 YEARS,OCCUPATION AGRICULTURIST R/AT ITAGALPURA VILALGE, HESARGHATTA HOBLI BENGALURU NORTH TALUK BENGALURU DISTRICT 560089 SINCE DEAD BY LRs., Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:15591 WP No. 12154 of 2022 3(a) SMT. KAVITHA. N, W/O LTE MOHAN KUMAR., DAUGHTER IN LAW OF MUNIKEMPAIAH, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, 3(b) SMT. SUPRIYA.M, W/O SRINIVASAIAH M.K, DAUGHTER OF LATE MUNIKEMPAIAH, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, BOTH ARE R/AT ITAGALPURA VILLAGE, HESARAGHATTA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, BENGALURU – 560 089. 4. THE TAHASILDAR BENGALURU NORTH TALUK BENGALURU 560009 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SAVITHRAMMA., AGA FOR R-2 & R-4; SRI. M.BALAKRISHNAN, ADVOCATE FOR R-1; SRI. M.SRINIVASA., ADVOCATE FOR R-3) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO-CALL FOR RECORDS FROM THE OFFICE OF THE R2 IN RESPECT OF REVISION PETITION NO.94/99-2000QUASH THE ANNEXURE-F DTD 15.07.2000 PASSED BY THE R2 AUTHORITY BEARING REVISION PETITION NO.94/99-2000 HOLDING SAME IS ILLEGAL, ARBITRARY AND WITHOUT APPLICATION OF MIND AN CONSEQUENTLY QUASH THE ANNEXURE-G DTD 25.06.2005 IN ITS BEARING NO.REVN PETN 94/99-2000 PASSED BY THE R2 AUTHORITY, ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUPHEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:15591 WP No. 12154 of 2022 ORAL ORDER 1. An order of mutation made in Inheritance proceedings i.e., IHC.14/1983-84 was challenged by Ramakrishnappa - respondent No.1 herein. 2. The Deputy Commissioner has entertained this Revision and by the impugned order dated 15.07.2000 has set aside the order passed in IHC.14/1983-84 which was passed on 23.12.1983. 3. In other words, at the instance of the petitioner, an order of mutation which was subsisting since 1983 has been set aside in the year 2000. 4. It is not in dispute that the katha was, in fact, standing in the name of Patalappa, the father of petitioner herein. If the katha of the property was standing in the name of Patalappa, obviously on his death, the entries will have to be mutated in favour of his successors. All that the revenue authorities - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:15591 WP No. 12154 of 2022 had done as per IHC.No.14/1983-84 was to enter the name of the legal heirs in the revenue records in the place of Patalappa. 5. In my view, this order could not have been challenged by respondent No.1, who admittedly does not have any right over the said land and was, in fact, making a claim for grant of this particular land. 6. As already stated above, since the katha was standing in the name of Patalappa, the entry made in favour of his successors cannot be annulled so long as the entry in favour of Patalappa was not challenged. As a result, the impugned orders Annexures-F and G cannot be sustained and the same are quashed. 7. However, it is noticed that the Deputy Commissioner has made observations that the revenue records in respect of the land in question belongs to the Government. Notwithstanding this order, it would be - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:15591 WP No. 12154 of 2022 open to the Deputy Commissioner to pass orders under Section 136(3) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, to examine whether the land in question belongs to the Government and the entries have been wrongly made, if he is so advised. Subject to the above, Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of. 8. In view of the disposal of the petition, all pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of. Sd/- (N S SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE HNM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 0