- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:12901 WP No. 52832 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 52832 OF 2016 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. RATHNA SHETTY W/O LATE MAHABALA SHETTY, AGED 70 YEARS, 2. NAGALAKSHMI SHETTY D/O LATE MAHABALA SHETTY, AGED 50 YEARS, 3. SATHISH SHETTY S/O LATE MAHABALA SHETTY, AGED 48 YEARS, 4. HARISH SHETTY S/O LATE MAHABALA SHETTY, AGED 46 YEARS, 5. GANESH SHETTY S/O LATE MAHABALA SHETTY, AGED 44 YEARS, 6. RAMESH SHETTY S/O LATE MAHABALA SHETTY, AGED 40 YEARS, 7. VINESH SHETTY S/O LATE MAHABALA SHETTY, AGED 38 YEARS, 8. REJESH SHETTY S/O LATE MAHABALA SHETTY, AGED 36 YEARS, Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:12901 WP No. 52832 of 2016 9. SRISHA SHETTY S/O LATE MAHABALA SHETTY, AGED 33 YEARS, ALL ARE RESIDING NEAR ITK HOSPITAL, SHRINIVASA NAGARA, SURATHKAL, MANGALURU, D.K.DISTRICT-575012. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. G RAVISHANKAR SHASTRY., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT, MANGALURU, D.K-575001 2. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER MANGALURU SUB-DIVISION, MANGALURU, D.K.DISTRICT-575001 3. THASILDAR, MANGALURU MANGALURU TALUK D.K.DISTRICT-575001 4. BHUJANGA SHETTY S/O LATE RAMAPPA SHETTY, AGED 74 YEARS, R/AT ANANTHA BETTU HOUSE, SHRINIVASA NAGARA, SURATHKAL, MANGALURU, D.K.DISTRICT-575012 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SAVITHRAMMA., AGA FOR R-1 TO R-3; R-4 IS SERVED & UNREPRESENTED) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 11.3.2016 PASSED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT, MANGALURU CERTIFIED COPY OF WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A, ETC. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:12901 WP No. 52832 of 2016 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 petitioners sought for mutation of their names on the basis of a decree under which their father— Mahabala Shetty was allotted the lands in question. 2. The Tahasildar refused to accept their plea and directed them to approach the Assistant Commissioner. 3. The Assistant Commissioner accepted the plea of the petitioners and directed the Tahasildar to mutate their names in accordance with the decree. 4. However, a revision was filed by respondent No.4 before the Deputy Commissioner. The Deputy Commissioner has set aside the order of the Assistant Commissioner and directed the parties to approach - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:12901 WP No. 52832 of 2016 the Civil Court. Hence, the petitioners are before this Court. 5. It is noticed from the order of the Deputy Commissioner that the claim by the petitioners on the basis of a decree passed by the Civil Court has not even been noticed, let alone be considered by the Deputy Commissioner. 6. If there is already a decree of the competent Civil Court in respect of the lands in question, in my view, it would have been appropriate for the Deputy Commissioner to consider the same and then pass an order on merits. 7. Since that exercise has not been undertaken, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remitted to the Deputy Commissioner with a direction to him to consider the effect and import of the decree passed by the Civil Court in O.S. No.35 of 1950 and also examine whether the petitioners herein are - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:12901 WP No. 52832 of 2016 entitled to claim as the legal heirs of the decree- holder in the said suit. 8. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. 9. In view of the disposal of the petition, all pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of. Sd/- (N S SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE RK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 58