- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:15505 WP No. 23190 of 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 23190 OF 2010 (KLR-RR/SUR) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. SAROJAMMA AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS W/O LATE P. BASAPPA RESIDING AT NO. 150, BENNIGANAHALLI DOORVANINAGAR POST, BANGALORE-560 016. SINCE DEAD BY HER LRs. 1(a) SMT. MANJULA W/O LATE RAJASHEKARAIAH AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS 1(b) SMT. MAMATHA .R D/O LATE RAJASHEKARAIAH AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS 1(c) SRI. LOKESH .R S/O LATE RAJASHEKARAIAH AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS 1(d) SMT. LALITHAMMA D/O LATE P.BASAPPA W/O RENUKARADHYA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS 1(e) SRI. MARIRUDRAIAH S/O LATE P. BASAPPA AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS 1(f) SMT. MANGALA GOWRI D/O LATE P.BASAPPA Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:15505 WP No. 23190 of 2010 W/O MANJUNATH .M AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS 1(g) SMT. LEELAVATHI D/O LATE P.BASAPPA W/O NARAYANAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS 1(h) SRI. VEDAPRAKASHA S/O LATE P.BASAPPA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS 1(i) SRI. ANAND KUMAR S/O LATE P.BASAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS 1(j) SMT. MANJULA .B D/O LATE P.BASAPPA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS 1(k) SRI. PRABHU .B S/O LATE P.BASAPPA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS 1(l) SRI. SADASHIVA S/O LATE P.BASAPPA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS ALL ARE R/AT No.150 1ST MAIN ROAD, BENNIGANAHALLI DOORAVANINAGAR POST BANGALORE-560 016. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. B.THYAGARAJA., ADVOCATE FOR LRs., OF DECEASED PETITIONER) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT OF - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:15505 WP No. 23190 of 2010 LAND REVENUE VIDHANA SOUDHA BANGALORE-560 001. 2. THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BANGALORE DISTRICT BANGALORE. 3. THE TAHASILDAR BANGALORE NORTH (ADDL.) TALUK YELAHANKA, BANGALORE DISTRICT. 4. SRI. MUNIYAPPA S/O GULLAPPA AGED ABOUTN 75 YEARS MAHADEVAKODIGEHALLI JALA HOBLI, BANGALORE NORTH TALUK BANGALORE DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SAVITHRAMMA., AGA FOR R-1 TO R-3; SRI. N.G.KOTRE., ADVOCATE FOR R-4) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DTD 22.1.10 PASSED BY THE R2 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-G AND CONSEQUENTLY QUASH THE MUTATION IN MR.NO.90/09-10 DATED 5.6.10 AND THE ENTRIES IN THE NAME OF THE GOVERNMENT IN RTC EXTRACT IN RESPECT OF THE PROPERTY BEARING SY.NO.119/P3 MEASURING 2 ACRES SITUATED AT MAHADEVAKODIGEHALLI, JALA HOBLI, BANGALORE NORTH (ADDL) TALUK, PRODUCED AT ANNEX-H & J RESPECTIVELY, ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:15505 WP No. 23190 of 2010 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA ORAL ORDER 1. This petition is filed challenging the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner under Section 136(3) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, whereby the Deputy Commissioner has come to the conclusion that the continuation of the name of the petitioner in the revenue record could not be sustained as it was an unauthenticated entry made without there being an order of grant. The Deputy Commissioner has also directed the name of the Government be entered in the revenue record. 2. On the last occasion, this Court directed the Tahsildar to file an affidavit as whether the land in question was granted to the vendor of the petitioner and also state as to what were the records available to indicate that the grant was made in respect of land in question. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:15505 WP No. 23190 of 2010 3. Today, the affidavit is filed by the Tahsildar, in which, he has stated as follows: "3. I humbly state that the land in question was, in fact, granted in favour of Muniyappa, the vendor of the petitioner. The following records available in the office of the Tahasildar, Bengaluru North, Yelahanka, Bengaluru substantiate the said grant: a. Darakasthu Register (Devanahalli) b. Saguvali Chit c. Darakasthu Sketech d. Kimmathu (Tax) c. Memorandum" 4. In light of the above statement of Tahsildar, it is obvious that the grant in favour of the petitioner's vendor is admitted and the available records do support that. In this view of the matter, the impugned order is quashed and as a consequence, since the grant is now found to be made in favour of petitioner's vendor and the petitioner has purchased the property, the Tahsildar shall ensure that the khatha be registered in the name of the petitioner - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:15505 WP No. 23190 of 2010 within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 5. The writ petition is accordingly allowed. Sd/- (N S SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE PKS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 42