- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:11965 WP No. 33321 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 33321 OF 2024 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. SHIVAMMA AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, W/O LATE RAJAPPA R/AT ALTALALHUNDI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, H.D. KOTE TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT. (SENIOR CITIZEN NOT CLAIMED) …PETITIONER (BY SRI. P. MOHANA CHANDRA.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDING, BANGALORE -560001 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, MYSURU DISTRICT. MYSURU-570005. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, HUNSUR SUB-DIVISION, HUNSUR TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT-571105. 4. THE TASHILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, HUNSUR, MYSURU DIST-571105. 5. MRS. K.P. MANJULA, Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:11965 WP No. 33321 of 2024 AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, W/O LATE R. MAHADEVAPPA 6. SHASHIKALA, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, D/O LATE MAHADEVAPPA 7. MR. M. GIRISH MAHENDRA, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, S/O LATE R. MAHADEVAPPA 8. ASHA RATHNA, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, D/O LATE R. MAHADEVAPPA R-5 TO R-8 ARE R/AT ALTHALHUNDI VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI, H.D. KOTE TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT-571125. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.V.SHIVA REDDY, AGA FOR R-1 TO R-4) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DTD 26.05.2023 PASSED BY R-2 IN PROCEEDING NO. RAP 34/2019 (RD 005- 0000216090) VIDE ANNEXURE-K AND THEREBY CONFIRMED THE ORDER PASSED BY R-3 IN PROCEEDING NO. RA NO. 103/15-16 DTD 31.10.2018 VIDE ANNEXURE-H, ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA ORAL ORDER 1. An order of mutation made, allegedly by consent, seeking to reflect an oral partition which was reduced into writing in the year 1997 was challenged by the - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:11965 WP No. 33321 of 2024 legal representatives of the brother of the petitioner who was a party to the partition. 2. The Assistant Commissioner set aside the order of mutation, which was said to have been passed by consent, on the ground that the khatha could not have been registered on the basis of an unregistered Partition Deed. This order of the Assistant Commissioner was affirmed in revision by the Deputy Commissioner, as a consequence of which, the petitioner is before this Court. 3. In my view, since the authorities have refused to act upon the unregistered Partition Deed of the year 1997, which was sought to be given effect to by way of mutation in the year 2012-13, they were justified in refusing to implement or give effect to the Partition Deed in the revenue entries. 4. The petitioner would have to approach the Civil Court, secure a decree either declaring that the partition that was effected in the year 1997 as - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:11965 WP No. 33321 of 2024 contended by her or in the alternative that she has a title over the property in question. It is obvious that if such a decree is obtained, the petitioner is entitled to seek for change of entries on that basis. 5. Subject to the above, the writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- (N S SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE PKS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9