- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22666 WP No. 18589 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO.18589 OF 2025 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. H.B. YASHODHA D/O. LATE BETTAIAH AND WIFE OF SHESHAPPA J. AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS 2. SMT. H.B. MAMATHA D/O. LATE BETTAIAH AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS BOTH ARE RESIDING AT #129, 6TH CROSS HALAHALLI MANDYA CITY-571 401. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI GAURAV G.K., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI H.C. CHELUVAIAH S/O. CHALUVAIAH @ CHIKKAHYDA AGED MAJOR. 2. SRI H.C. KRISHNAMURTHY S/O. SRI CHALUVAIAH @ CHIKKAHYDA. 3. SMT. BHAGYASUDHA D/O. CHALUVAIAH @ CHIKKAHYDA AND W/O. SRI VENKATESH RESPONDENT NOS.1 TO 3 ARE RESIDING IN 6TH CROSS, HALAHALLI MANDYA CITY-571 401. Digitally signed by NAGARAJA B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22666 WP No. 18589 of 2025 4. CITY MUNCIPAL COUNCIL MYSORE BANGALORE ROAD NEAR DC OFFICE, ASHOK NAGAR MANDYA-571401 REPRESENTED BY COMMISSIONER. 5. REGIONAL COMMISSIONER "HIGH VIEW", VINOBA ROAD OPPOSITE KALAMANDIR MYSURU-570 005. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI G.M. ANAND, ADVOCATE FOR R-4) * * * THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO A) CALL FOR RECORD, B) QUASHING THE CHANGE OF KATHA WITH RESPECT TO THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY VIDE KTP NO.116/2017-18 OF THE PROPERTY BEARING KHATHA NO.D6/1292/8634/H225 AT 7TH CROSS, HALAHALLI, MANDYA CITY FROM THE NAME OF SMT. KALYANAMMA TO THE NAMES OF THE RESPONDENT NOS. 1 TO 3 (ANNEXURE-A) AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER The petitioners are aggrieved by the change of katha effected by the respondent-authority on the basis of a registered sale deed dated 03.08.1959. The petitioners, claiming to be the grandchildren of one Smt. Kalyanamma, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22666 WP No. 18589 of 2025 have disputed the validity of the said sale deed. It is a well- settled position in law, as consistently reiterated by this Court in several judgments, that disputes pertaining to title or validity of registered sale deeds cannot be adjudicated in mutation proceedings. The very fact that the petitioners' claim is premised on an allegation that the sale deed dated 03.08.1959 was executed by their grandmother, Smt. Kalyanamma, is sufficient to hold that such a claim involves disputed questions of fact and title, which can only be adjudicated by a competent civil court. The mere fact that the name of the purchaser was not reflected in the katha as of 2017 and that the name of Smt. Kalyanamma continued in the revenue records, does not, by itself, negate the effect of the registered sale deed. Once a sale deed is duly executed and registered, the revenue authorities are statutorily bound to act upon such documents for the purposes of mutation. If the petitioners intend to challenge the validity of the said sale deed, their remedy lies in approaching the jurisdictional civil court for appropriate - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22666 WP No. 18589 of 2025 relief. This Court is of the view that the mutation proceedings cannot be made a forum for deciding complex title disputes. Accordingly, while reserving liberty to the petitioners to avail appropriate remedies before the competent civil court, the writ petition stands disposed of. SD/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE HDK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6