SRI.L.RAJASHEKARA MURTHY v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
WP/19509/2025 · 2025-07-08
E S Indiresh
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 30110 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 30110 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24664 WP No. 19509 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.19509 OF 2025 (KLR-RES)
BETWEEN:
SRI. L. RAJASHEKARA MURTHY S/O LATE B. LINGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, RESIDING AT DUGGALAPURA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, TARIKERE TALUK, CHIKAMAGALURU DISTRICT-577 228. …PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SUNIL S RAO, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. T. SESHAGIRI RAO, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, M.S. BUILDING, KR CIRCLE, BENGALURU-560 001.
2.
THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CHIKAMAGALURU DISTRICT AT CHIKAMAGALURU-577 228.
3.
THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER TARIKERE SUB-DIVISION, AT TARIKERE, CHIKAMAGALURU DISTRICT-577 228.
4.
THE THASILDAR TARIKERE, TARIKERE (TALUK), CHIKAMAGALURU DISTRICT-577 228.
Digitally signed by KRISHNAPPA LAXMI YASHODA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
- 2 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24664 WP No. 19509 of 2025
5.
SRI. RAJEGOWDA S/O LATE BOMARAYAGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, RESIDING AT BAVIKERE VILLAGE, LAKAVALLI HOBLI, TARIKERE TALUK, CHIKAMAGALURU DISTRICT-577 228.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SIDDHARTH BABU RAO, AGA FOR R1 TO R4)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION FOR QUASHING OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 18.3.2025 ONE PASSED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT IN RP NO.31/2023 FOUND AT ANNEXURE-A TO THE WRIT PETITION AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
ORAL ORDER
Learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for respondents No.1 to 4.
2. In this writ petition, petitioner is assailing the
order dated 18.03.2025 (Annexure-A), passed by the 2nd respondent.
- 3 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24664 WP No. 19509 of 2025
3. Heard the learned counsel Sri. Sunil.S.Rao, appearing for the petitioner and the Sri. Siddharth Babu Rao, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondent – State nos. 1 to 4.
4. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner by inviting the attention of this Court to the
judgment and decree passed in O.S.Nos.132/1997 and 114/2002, on the file of the Court of the Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and Addl. JMFC, Tarikere (Annexure-D), that the rights of the parties are already crystallized insofar as the possession relating to the land in question. In that view of the matter, the finding recorded by the respondent No.2 requires to be interfered with in this writ petition.
5. Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondents sought to justify the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent - Deputy Commissioner, in Revision Petition No.31/2023 at Annexure-A.
- 4 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24664 WP No. 19509 of 2025
6. In the light of the submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, it is forthcoming that one Sri Hoovappa Gowda, S/o Kariyappa Gowda, has sold the land in question in favour of the revision petitioner before the respondent No.2 and in that view of the matter as the mutation has been made pursuant to the execution of the registered sale deed, I am of the view that no interference is called for in this writ petition. Though the
learned counsel invited attention of this Court to the
judgment and decree passed in O.S.Nos.132/1997 and 114/2002, however, on careful examination of the same would indicate that the said suit is filed seeking relief of permanent injunction and no issues have been framed by the trial court with regard to the title of the property in question. In that view of the matter, the finding recorded by the respondent No.2 is just and proper and there is no interference called for in this writ petition.
7. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. However, it is open for the petitioner to seek relief of
- 5 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24664 WP No. 19509 of 2025
declaration in respect of the subject land in a manner known to law, if so advised.
Sd/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE
KLY