- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22925 WP No. 18019 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 18019 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SRI SHANKAR R, S/O. SRI. RANGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/AT.55, GUNI AGRAHARA GRAMA, SHIVAKOTE POST, HESARAGHATTA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK - 560 089. 2. SRI. UMESH H, S/O. SRI. HANUMANTHARAYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/AT NO.113, 6TH CROSS, 1ST MAIN ROAD, NAGASANDRA POST, MANJUNATHANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 073. 3. SMT. PREMALATHA S.C, W/O SRI. ASHWATHANARAYANA S.V, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/AT KURUBARAHALLI GRAMA, KODIGEHALLI, BENGALURU RURAL - 561 203. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. R.B. SADASIVAPPA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. L. DORESWAMY, S/O LATE SRI. LINGAPPA, Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22925 WP No. 18019 of 2025 AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS. R/AT APPAGONDANAHALLI, MANNE POST, THYAMAGONDLU HOBLI, NELAMANGALA TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562 132. 2. SMT. UMA, W/O. LATE K.RAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS. 3. SMT. JYOTHI R. D/O LATE K. RAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, 4. SMT. ANUJA R, D/O LATE K.RAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS. 5. SRI. DHANANJAYA R. S/O LATE K. RAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS. 6. SRI. NAGESH R. S/O LATE K. RAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS. 7. SMT. BYLAMMA, W/O MUDDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS. RESPONDENTS 2 TO 7 R/AT GIRIYANAPALYA VILLAGE, SOMPURA HOBLI, NELAMANGALA TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562 111. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAVISHANKAR S, ADVOCATE FOR R1) - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22925 WP No. 18019 of 2025 THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 03/05/2025 PASSED THE 1ST ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC. NELAMANGALA EX NO. 10/2022 VIDE ANNEXURE-A ON I.A. NO.6 AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER The petitioners are before this Court calling in question an order dated 03.05.2025 passed on IA No.6 in Ex.P.No.10/2022 by which the concerned Court rejects the application of the petitioners seeking maintenance of status-quo qua the mutation entries. 2. Heard Shri R.B. Sadasivappa, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Shri Ravishankar S., learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the sale deed is in favour of the petitioners dated 06.08.2024 measuring 8 acres 20 guntas as obtained in the schedule. The first respondent is said to have interfered with the possession of the property and therefore, the petitioners - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22925 WP No. 18019 of 2025 had to file an application under Order 21 Rule 97 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ('the CPC' for short) in the aforesaid Ex.P.No.10/2022. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that he is the decree holder and seeking to execute the decree in the aforesaid execution petition. 5. The issue in the lis is with regard to the mutation entries in the name of the petitioners and the non consideration of the application maintenance of status-quo, qua the RTC and mutation before the concerned Court. In the light of the issue revolving around a narrow compass, at this juncture, I deem it appropriate to direct the Tahsildar to maintain status-quo qua the entries of the RTC and mutation. 6. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that he comes to know of attempt to challenge the mutation entries in furtherance of Ex.P.No.10/2022. The application under Order 21 Rule 97 of the CPC filed by him is still pending consideration before the concerned Court. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22925 WP No. 18019 of 2025 7. Till the application under Order 21 Rule 97 of the CPC is considered and appropriate orders are passed in accordance with law, I deem it appropriate to direct the Revenue authorities to maintain status-quo, qua the suit schedule property. 8. With the aforesaid observations, the petition stands disposed. 9. It is needless to observe that the concerned Court shall expeditiously dispose the application under Order 21 Rule 97 of the CPC. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE JY List No.: 1 Sl No.: 49 CT: BHK