- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25299 WP No. 22266 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO. 22266 OF 2024 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: ADAM KUNHI S/O ISUBU BEARY, AGED 61 YEARS, R/AT BAYABE HOUSE, KEDILA GRAMA AND POST, BANTWAL TALUK D.K. - 574220 (PETITIONER IS NOT CLAIMING BENEFITS CONFERRED TO SENIOR CITIZENS ) …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAVISHANKAR SHASTRY G., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT MANGALURU D K – 575001 2. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER MANGALORE SUB DIVISION MANGALURU D K – 575001 3. THASILDAR BANTWAL TALUK BANTWAL, D K DISTRICT-574219. Digitally signed by JUANITA THEJESWINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25299 WP No. 22266 of 2024 SRI UMMARE BEARY SINCE DECEASED BY LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES K ALIYAMMA SINCE DECEASED BY RESPONDENTS NOS. 5 TO 13 4. K. IDDU KUNHI AGED 49 YEARS S/O LATE UMMARE BEARY, 5. ASEEYA AGED 47 YEARS D/O LATE UMMARE BEARY, 6. K ABDUL REHAMAN AGED 45 YEARS S/O LATE UMMARE BEARY, 7. K ABUUBACKER AGED 43 YEARS S/O LATE UMMARE BEARY, 8. K ABDUL HAMEED AGED 40 YEARS S/O LATE UMMARE BEARY, 9. K ABDUL RAZAK AGED 38 YEARS S/O LATE UMMARE BEARY, 10. K MAHAMMED HUSSAIN AGED 36 YEARS S/O LATE UMMARE BEARY, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25299 WP No. 22266 of 2024 11. K JAMEELA AGED 34 YEARS D/O LATE UMMARE BEARY, 12. MAIMUNNA AGED 32 YEARS D/O LATE UMMARE BEARY, R5 TO R12 ARE ALL R/A KORYA HOUSE, BALTHILA VILLAGE, POST BALTHILA BANTWAL TALUK, D .K. DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY THEIR GPA HOLDER SRI. ABOOBAKKER S/O. MOIDU KUNHI, BAYABLE HOUSE KEDILA VILLAGE, BANTWAL TALUK, D K DISTRICT - 574220 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. NAVYA SHEKHAR., AGA FOR R1 TO R3 SRI. DIVAKARA K NIDVANNAYA., ADVOCATE FOR R5, R8, R10 & R11 (VC) R6, R7, R9, R12 & R13 ARE SERVED V/O DT.25/04/2025 R5 TO R13 ARE LRS OF R4) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DTD. 16.07.2024 IN CASE NO. CDS.R.A.P 29/2021 PASSED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT, MANGALURU CERTIFIED COPY OF WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNX-A AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25299 WP No. 22266 of 2024 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER In this writ petition, the petitioner herein is assailing the order dated 16.07.2024 in case No.CDS:R.A.P.29/2021 on the file of respondent No.1 (Annexure 'A') to the writ petition. 2. Heard Sri Ravishankar Shastry, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Smt.Navya Shekhar, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents No.1 to 3-State and Sri Divakara K.Nidvannaya, learned Counsel appearing for respondents No.5, 8, 10 and 11. 3. Sri Ravishankar Shastry, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner invited the attention of this Court to the judgment and decree dated 13.03.2007 in RFA No.21/1999, wherein the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court allowed the appeal preferred by the petitioner herein wherein, the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.45/1993 dated 12.11.1998, has been set aside. In - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25299 WP No. 22266 of 2024 that view of the matter, the learned Counsel submitted that the finding recorded by respondent No.1, that the second suit in O.S.No.36/2018 cannot be considered for the purpose of entering the name of the petitioner herein in the revenue records. It is also argued by the learned Counsel for the petitioner by referring to the order dated 08.08.1994 in W.P.No.12085/1994 (Annexure 'E') in the earlier round of litigation, wherein, this Court, disposed of the writ petition to await the judgment and decree in O.S.No.45/1993, which ultimately resulted in the judgment and decree in RFA No.21/1999 dated 13.03.2007. Accordingly, he sought for interference of this Court. 4. Per contra, Sri Divakara K.Nidvannaya, learned Counsel appearing for the contesting respondents submitted that though the judgment and decree in O.S.No.45/1993 has reached finality in RFA No.21/1999 before the Hon'ble Division Bench, however, this Court has reserved liberty to the respondent therein-plaintiff to - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25299 WP No. 22266 of 2024 initiate such other suit or proceedings to enforce his right and accordingly, O.S.No.36/2018 is filed before the competent Civil Court and same is pending consideration. Accordingly, learned Counsel sought for dismissal of the writ petition. 5. Learned Additional Government Advocate sought to justify the impugned order passed by respondent No.1. 6. In the light of the submissions made by the learned Counsel appearing for the parties and on careful examination of the order dated 08.08.1994 in W.P.No.12085/1994 (Annexure 'E'), this Court at paragraph No.5 has held that the parties have to await the judgment and decree that may be passed in O.S.No.45/1993 insofar as the rights of the parties are concerned. 7. The judgment and decree in O.S.No.45/1993 was challenged before this Court in RFA No.21/1999 and this Court by judgment and decree dated 13.03.2007 at Annexure 'F', allowed the appeal preferred by the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25299 WP No. 22266 of 2024 petitioner herein and accordingly, set aside the judgment and decree in O.S.No.45/1993 dated 12.11.1998. Though this Court has reserved liberty to the plaintiff therein to institute such other suit, however, the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.45/1993 has reached finality. 8. In that view of the matter, I find force in the submission made by the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the finding recorded by respondent No.1 that to await the judgment and decree in O.S.No.36/2018, is incorrect and therefore, the order dated 16.07.2024 passed by respondent No.1 at Annexure 'A' is hereby set aside. 9. Accordingly, the order dated 11.06.2020 at Annexure 'B' passed by respondent No.2-Assistant Commissioner, Mangaluru Sub-Division, Mangaluru, is hereby confirmed. It is needless to say that the name of the petitioner is being continued in the revenue records and the same has to be continued until the rights of the parties are crystallised in O.S.No.36/2018. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25299 WP No. 22266 of 2024 10. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner has produced the representation dated 12.11.2024, by way of a memo dated 10.07.2025, stating that the GPA holder of respondents No.4 to 13 herein has submitted an application to respondent No.1 stating that the present writ petition has been rejected on 28.10.2024. The said conduct of the GPA holder of respondents No.4 to 13 herein is deprecated and therefore, the said submission made by the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner has been considered in the light of the observations made herein. 11. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE JT/- CT: JL