- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:6509 WP No. 24021 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 24021 OF 2016 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: 1. MANJUNATH S/O LATE PUTTAHONNAPPA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS 2. PARAMASHIVAIAH S/O LATE PUTTAHONNAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS 3. SOMASHEKARA S/O LATE PUTTAHONNAPPA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS ALL ARE RESIDING AT JIGANI VILLAGE ANNAPURNESHWARI HOTEL, NEAR MUTHYALAMMA TEMPLE STREET JIGANI MAIN ROAD ANEKAL TALUK BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. RAJATH.D.V., FOR SRI. G.MANIVANNAN., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER TALUK PANCHAYATH ANEKAL TALUK, ANEKAL. 2. TOWN MUNICIPAL CORPORATION JIGANI, ITTINA NAGAR, JIGANI, BENGALURU-560105. Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:6509 WP No. 24021 of 2016 3. CHIKKA APPAJI S/O LATE MALLAIAH SHETTY AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS, RESIDING AT JIGANI VILLAGE NEAR A.K.N.HOSPITAL MAIN ROAD JIGANI HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT 4. MALLESH SINCE DEAD BY LRs., 4(a) SMT.MANGALAMMA., W/O LATE MALLESH, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, 4(b) MALLIKARJUNA., S/O LATE MALLESH, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, 4(c) DEEPU,S/O LATE MALLESH, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R-4(a) TO (c) ARE R/AT JIGANI VILLAGE, SHIVANAGARA MAIN ROAD., JIGANI HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK-56210 BENGALURU DISTRICT. 5. ASHWATHAMMA AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS W/O LATE KRISHNAPPA R/AT JIGANIMAIN ROAD JIGANI VILLAGE & HOBLI ANEKAL TALUK BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT 6. YATHEESH K. RAWGOL AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS W/O LATE KRISHNAPPA R/AT JIGANIMAIN ROAD JIGANI VILLAGE & HOBLI ANEKAL TALUK - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:6509 WP No. 24021 of 2016 BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT SINCE DEAD., REPRESENTED BY LR SOLE LR ALREADY AS RECORD AS R-5. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.S.PRAKASH., ADVOCATE FOR R-1; SRI. NAGARAJ JAIN., ADVOCATE FOR R-2; R-3 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED; SRI.V.NAGA REDDAY., ADVOCATE FOR R-4(a TO c); SRI.R.H.DESHPANDE., ADVOCATE FOR R-5; [R6 IS DECEASED AND R-5 IS HIS LR]) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE ENTIRE RECORDS FROM R-1 & 2 AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 19.06.2015 PASSED BY R-1 IN VPC APPEAL NO.11/2013-14 AT ANNEX-D AND FURTHER DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.2 TO CONTINUE THE ENTRIES IN THE REVENUE RECORDS AS STOOD IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONERS, 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 - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:6509 WP No. 24021 of 2016 ORAL ORDER 1. The Writ Petition is filed to set aside the order dated 19.06.2015, which is in the following terms – “ : DzÉñÀ : D£ÉÃPÀ¯ï vÁ®ÆèPÀÄ, fUÀt ºÉÆç½, fUÀt UÁæªÀÄzÀ ºÀ¼Éà SÁ£ÉõÀĪÀiÁj £ÀA.122 ºÉƸÀ SÁ£ÉõÀĪÀiÁj £ÀA.119 ªÀÄÆ®vÀ: ªÉÄîä£À«zÁgÀgÀÄ CªÀgÀ ¦vÁæfðvÀ D¹ÛAiÀiÁVzÀÄÝ, D d«Ää£À°è 12 UÀd x 10 UÀdªÉAzÀÄ vÉÆÃj¸À¯ÁVzÉ. ºÀ¼Éà SÁ£ÉõÀĪÀiÁj £ÀA.122 ºÉƸÀ SÁ£ÉµÀĪÀiÁj £ÀA.119gÀ ¨sÁUÀªÁVzÀÄÝ 6£Éà ¥ÀæwªÁ¢ ¥ÀAZÁAiÀÄw C¢üPÁjAiÀĪÀgÀÄ 1,2 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 3 ¥ÀæwªÁ¢UÀ¼À ºÉ¸ÀjUÉ SÁ£ÉõÀĪÀiÁj £ÀA.115 JAzÀÄ ¸ÀļÀÄî zÁR¯É ¸Àȶֹ ªÀÄÆ®vÀ SÁ£ÉõÀĪÀiÁj £ÀA.114 d«Ää£À MlÄÖ «¹ÛÃtðzÀ°è 3£Éà ªÀåQÛ¬ÄAzÀ 15 UÀd x 38 ½ UÀd JAzÀÄ zÁR¯É ¸Àȶֹ ºÉƸÀzÁV SÁ£ÉõÀĪÀiÁj £ÀA.115 JAzÀÄ zÁR¯ÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¸ÀȶֹgÀĪÀÅzÀÄ zÁR¯ÉUÀ¼À DzsÁgÀ¢AzÀ PÀAqÀÄ §gÀÄvÀÛzÉ. DzÀÄzÀjAzÀ ºÀ¼Éà SÁ£ÉõÀĪÀiÁj £ÀA.122 ºÉƸÀ SÁ£ÉõÀĪÀiÁj £ÀA.119 gÀ°è ªÀÄÆ® «¹ÛÃtðzÀ ¥ÀƪÀð ¥À²ÑªÀÄ 4 1/2 GvÀÛgÀ zÀQët 38 1/2 UÀd d«ÄãÀ£ÀÄß ºÉZÀÄѪÀjAiÀiÁV SÁ£ÉõÀĪÀiÁj £ÀA.114gÀ d«ÄäUÉ SÁ£ÉõÀĪÀiÁj £ÀA.115 JAzÀÄ ¸ÀȶֹzÀ SÁ£ÉõÀĪÀiÁj £ÀA.115£ÀÄß ªÀeÁPÀj¹ ªÀÄÆ®vÀ ºÀ¼Éà SÁ£ÉõÀĪÀiÁj £ÀA.122 ºÉƸÀ SÁ£ÉõÀĪÀiÁj £ÀA.119gÀ ªÀÄÆ® ZÉPÀÄ̧A¢ DzsÁgÀzÀAvÉ ªÀiÁgÀªÀÄä£À zÉêÀ¸ÁÜ£ÀPÉÌ ¸ÉÃjgÀĪÀ 12 UÀd x 10 UÀd d«ÄäUÉ £ÀªÀÄÆ£É £ÀA.9 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 10£ÀÄß zÁR°¸À®Ä F ªÀÄÆ®PÀ DzÉò¸À¯ÁVzÉ.” - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:6509 WP No. 24021 of 2016 2. As could be seen from the above, basically the Executive Officer has embarked upon an enquiry and given a finding that khaneshumari No.115 was a part of khaneshumari No.114 and he has de-alienated the extent of the property. In my view, such a procedure is impermissible. 3. It is also admitted by the learned counsel appearing for respondent No.5 that respondent No.5 has, in fact, instituted a suit in O.S. No.286/2016 in which the property in question is involved and the said suit is one for declaration. 4. In my view, since the respondent No.5 is already before this Court, it is obvious that if he secures a decree, the authorities would be bound by a decree. Consequently, the order passed by the Executive Officer cannot be sustained and the same is quashed. 5. It is, however, made clear that in the event respondent No.5 succeeds in O.S. No.286/2016, the - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:6509 WP No. 24021 of 2016 Authorities would be bound by the said decree and make entries accordingly. 6. If the katha has been changed pursuant to the impugned order, the same shall be restored in favour of the petitioner. This Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of. 7. 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.: 36