- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:1366 WP No. 14596 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 14596 OF 2021 (LB-BMP) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. MOHAMMED RAFIZ S/O LATE SYED YUSUF AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS NO.24, 11TH CROSS SWIMMING POOL EXTENSION MALLESHWARAM BANGALORE-560003 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. B R VISWANATH., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER HUDSON CIRCLE BANGALORE-560001. 2. THE REVENUE OFFICER, RANGASWAMY MALLESHWARAM RANGE, B.B.M.P (REVENUE DEPARTMENT) CORPORATION BOYS HIGH SCHOOL BUILDING MALLESHWARAM BANGALORE-560 004. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. JAGADEESWARA N R., ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA., PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT AUTHORITIES TO CONSIDER THE Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:1366 WP No. 14596 of 2021 APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION OF KATHA AND ALSO REGISTER THE KATHA IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER, 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 ORAL ORDER 1. The prayer in this petition is for issuance of a direction to the respondent-authorities to consider the application for registration of Khata in favour of the petitioner. 2. The case of the petitioner is based on the fact that he has been in possession of the property in question since 1960. It is the case of the petitioner that an unregistered sale deed was executed in his favor, but subsequently, a rival claim was raised by one T.Sonnappa who had initiated eviction proceedings under the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961 and it is contended that the said proceedings were dismissed and it was held that the petitioner was in possession. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:1366 WP No. 14596 of 2021 3. It is also contended that after the death of Sonnappa, his wife filed one more petition for eviction and that was also dismissed as withdrawn. It is therefore contented that there is a clear declaration that the petitioner is the owner of the property. Consequently, the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (‘BBMP') is bound to register the Khata in his favour. 4. It is also argued that right from the initiation of proceedings by Sonnappa and even before this Court, the fact that the petitioner is in possession remains undisputed. 5. It is contended that since Sonnappa himself had sought for eviction, the factum of the previous possession was admitted. It is also stated that pursuant to the order passed by this Court directing a spot inspection be conducted, the BBMP also has acknowledged that the petitioner has been in possession and therefore, it was just and necessary - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:1366 WP No. 14596 of 2021 that a direction be issued to the BBMP to issue Khata in favour of the petitioner. 6. It is to be stated that in order to register the Khata, the BBMP can entertain a claim only if it is based on a registered document in cases of transfer of title. So long as there is no registered document, the BBMP would not be empowered to register the Khata in favour of a claimant, unless there is a decree of the Court or some other instrument having the force of law which confers right, title on the applicant. 7. Since it is contended that the petitioner has been in possession for the past 40 years and rival claims have been repelled by the civil court, it will be open for the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum and obtain an appropriate decree declaring that he is the owner of the property. On such a decree being obtained, obviously the BBMP would be bound - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:1366 WP No. 14596 of 2021 to change the Khata, but, until then, the petitioner’s claim for Khatha cannot be entertained. 8. The writ petition is therefore dismissed subject to the above. Sd/- (N S SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE RK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 51