- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38312 WP No. 7511 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO.7511 OF 2025 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI NARASIMHA MURTHY S/O. LATE CHANNAPPA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS R/AT ANCHIPURA VILLAGE BIDADI HOBLI, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK BENGALURU DISTRICT 2. SMT. MUNINARASAMMA W/O. M. NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS R/AT BASAVANNA TEMPLE ROAD DODDABELE VILLAGE, KENGERI HOBLI BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK BENGALURU DISTRICT 3. SMT. JAYALAKSHMAMMA W/O. LAKKAPPA AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS R/AT DODDABELE VILLAGE KENGERI HOBLI BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK BENGALURU DISTRICT. 4. SRI MUNINARASAPPA S/O. LATE NARASIMHAIAH AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS R/AT KERECHOODANAHALLI VILLAGE UTTARAHALLI HOBLI BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK BENGALURU DISTRICT Digitally signed by JUANITA THEJESWINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38312 WP No. 7511 of 2025 5. SRI CHANDRAPPA S/O. LATE NARASIMHAIAH AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS R/AT KERECHOODANAHALLI VILLAGE UTTARAHALLI HOBLI BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK BENGALURU DISTRICT PETITIONERS 4 AND 5 ARE REPRESENTED BY THEIR G.P.A HOLDER SRI NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS S/O. LATE MADAPPA R/AT BASAVANNA TEMPLE ROAD DODDABELE VILLAGE, KENGERI HOBLI BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK BENGALURU DISTRICT …PETITIONERS (BY SRI SREEVATSA, SR. COUNSEL FOR; SRI SHIVA SHANKAR C., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE M.S. BUILDING DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU-560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BENGALURU SOUTH SUB-DIVISION KANDAYA BHAVAN KEMPEGOWDA ROAD BENGALURU-560 009 3. THE TAHSILDAR BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK KANDAYA BHAVAN - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38312 WP No. 7511 of 2025 KEMPEGOWDA ROAD BENGALURU-560 009 4. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK KANDAYA BHAVAN KEMPEGOWDA ROAD BENGALURU-560 009 5. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT BENGALURU-560 001 6. SRI NARAYANAPPA S/O. SRI SOMANNA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS 7. MUTHAMMA W/O. LATE SIDDAPPA RESPONDENT NOS.6 AND 7 ARE R/AT DODDABELE COLONY KENGERI HOBLI, CHUDENAPURA POST BENGALURU-560 060 8. MRS. MUNINARSAMMA W/O. SRI NARSIMHAYA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS R/AT DODDABELE COLONY KENGERI HOBLI, CHUDENAPURA POST BENGALURU-560 060 9. SRI M. GALAPPA S/O. LATE MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS 10. SRI MUNIRAJU S/O. LATE MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38312 WP No. 7511 of 2025 RESPONDENT NOS.9 AND 10 ARE R/AT DODDABELE COLONY KENGERI HOBLI, CHUDENAPURA POST BENGALURU-560 060 11. SMT. CHENNAMMA D/O. LATE SRI MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS R/AT K. CHUDAHALLI, UTTARAHALLI HOBLI SOMANAHALLI POST BENGALURU-560 082 12. VEERAMMA D/O. LATE SRI MUNIYAPPA W/O. NARSIMHAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/AT C. N. NO.79, 13TH CROSS MTS LAYOUT, K. S. TOWN BENGALURU-560 060 13. SRI BASAVARAJU D. S/O. LATE SRI DASAPPA AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS 14. SRI NANJAPPA S/O. LATE SRI DASAPPA AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS 15. SRI NAGARAJU S/O. LATE SRI DASAPPA AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS RESPONDENT NOS.13, 14 AND 15 ARE R/AT DODDABELE KENGERI HOBLI, CHUDENAPURA POST BENGALURU-560 060 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38312 WP No. 7511 of 2025 16. SMT. LALITHA W/O. LATE LOKESH AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS 17. SRI MUNIRAJU S/O. LATE NARASIMHAIAH AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS RESPONDENT NOS.16 AND 17 ARE R/AT DODDABELE KENGERI HOBLI, CHUDENAPURA POST BENGALURU-560 060 18. SRI BASAMMA W/O. KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS R/AT MUKKODLU, UTTARAHALLI HOBLI THATTAGUPPE POST BENGALURU-560 082 19. SRI JAYAMMA W/O. MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS R/AT GLAKAMALE, UTTARAHALLI HOBLI TARALU POST BENGALURU-560 082 20. SRI GURUMURTHY S/O. LATE SRI GURAPPA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS R/AT: DODDABELE COLONY KENGERI HOBLI, CHUDENAPURA POST BENGALURU-561 060 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. B. P. RADHA, A.G.A., FOR R-1 TO R-5; SRI NISCHAL DEV, ADVOCATE FOR R-6 TO R-19) - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38312 WP No. 7511 of 2025 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE 3RD RESPONDENT-TAHSILDAR, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK, AND THE 4TH RESPONDENT-SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK, TO IMPLEMENT THE ORDER DATED 18.10.2024 IN CASE NO.R.A(S).296/2024 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT-ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU SOUTH SUB-DIVISION, BENGALURU AT ANNEXURE-C AND CONSEQUENTLY, DIRECT THE 3RD AND 4TH RESPONDENTS TO EFFECT/MUTATE/ TRANSFER THE KHATHA IN RESPECT OF THE LAND BEARING SY.NO.7/5, (OLD SY.NO.7), TOTALLY MEASURING 18.00 ACRES SITUATED AT DODDABELE VILLAGE, KENGERI HOBLI, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK, BENGALURU, IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONERS AND FURTHER DIRECT TO SHOW THE NAMES OF THE PETITIONERS IN THE RECORD OF RIGHTS (RTC) IN RESPECT OF THE LANDS IN QUESTION AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION IS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS ORAL ORDER The petitioners are seeking a writ of mandamus directing the 3rd respondent-Tahsildar, Bangalore South Taluk to enter the names of the petitioners in the revenue records in respect of 18 Acres of land in Sy.No.7/5 (old Sy.No.7) of Doddabele Village, Kengeri Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38312 WP No. 7511 of 2025 2. Learned Senior Counsel Sri.Srivatsa appearing for the petitioners submits that the occupancy rights were conferred in favour of one Sri.Narasimhaiah, the father of petitioners No.4 and 5 and Sri.Channappa, the father of petitioner No.1, in respect of 9.00 Acres each in Sy.No.7/5 (old Sy.No.7) of Doddabele Village, Kengeri Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk, in proceedings bearing No.LRF 2382/1976 and LRF 2383/1976, at the hands of the Land Tribunal, Bangalore South Taluk. The orders were passed by the Land Tribunal on 31.08.1979 and thereafter, Form No.10 were issued in favour of the grantees. However, when the Tahsildar and the Block Development Officer sought to interfere with the possession of the lands in question, the petitioners earlier filed Writ Petition Nos. 16360-61/1992, where interim directions were issued by this Court protecting the possession of the petitioners. The said writ petition was disposed of, directing the petitioners to approach the competent Civil Court to seek necessary - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38312 WP No. 7511 of 2025 reliefs’ and the same was affirmed at the hands of the Hon’ble Division Bench. 3. Consequently, the petitioners filed their respective suits O.S.No.715/1996 and O.S.No.716/1996 on the file of the learned I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Bangalore Rural District, seeking declaration and permanent injunction against the State, the Tahsildar and the Block Development Officer. The said suits were decreed on 01.04.2016 after contest. It is on this basis that the petitioners are seeking directions to the Tahsildar to enter the name of the petitioners in the revenue records, since the petitioners are the legal heirs of Late Sri.Narasimhaiah and Sri Channappa, who were conferred occupancy rights at the hands of the Land Tribunal. 4. Nevertheless, when the Tahsildar failed to enter the names of the petitioners in the revenue records, and on the other hand, the Assistant Commissioner passed an order on 03.08.2016 in proceedings bearing No.LND RA(S) 7/2016-17, directing the Tahsildar, Bangalore South Taluk - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38312 WP No. 7511 of 2025 to initiate proceedings under Section 67(2) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, (hereinafter referred to as, ‘the Act’, for short) to claim title over the lands in question and evict the petitioners, therefore, the petitioners approached this Court in W.P.No.49738/2016. This Court had initially stayed the orders of the Assistant Commissioner and all further proceedings at the hands of the Tahsildar and finally disposed of the matter on 21.09.2023, recording a finding that the Civil Court in O.S.No.715/1996 and O.S.No.716/1996 had declared the title in favour of the petitioners and therefore, the question of reopening the proceedings indirectly asserting that the property belongs to the Government does not stand to any legal scrutiny, nor are there any other grounds made out as per law at the hands of the Revenue Authorities or the State. Accordingly, this Court set aside the proceedings initiated at the hands of the Assistant Commissioner and the Tahsildar, while allowing the said writ petition. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38312 WP No. 7511 of 2025 5. Learned Senior Counsel would further submit that during the course of these proceedings, it appears that the Special Deputy Commissioner took up suo-motu proceedings exercising the powers conferred under Section 136(3) of the Act, in R.P.No.224/2025 and passed an interim order on 17.04.2025 staying the orders passed by the Assistant Commissioner dated 18.10.2024. 6. Pursuant thereto, the petitioners herein filed an appeal before the Assistant Commissioner, Bangalore South Sub-Division in R.A.(S) 296/2024 seeking directions to the Tahsildar to enter the name of the petitioners in the revenue records. The Assistant Commissioner passed an order on 18.10.2024 directing the Tahsildar to mutate or transfer or effect the revenue records in respect of 18 Acres of land i.e., 9 Acres each in favour of the legal heirs of Late Sri.Narasimhaya and Sri.Channappa. Learned Senior Counsel has pointed out to Annexure-E, which is a communication made by the Principal Secretary to the Special Tahsildar with reference to letter dated 21.01.2024 - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38312 WP No. 7511 of 2025 written by the Tahsildar seeking clarification and guidance at the hands of the State Government. At Annexure-E, the Principal Secretary, through Under Secretary to Government, directed the Tahsildar to take action at his level only. 7. Learned Senior Counsel submits that during the course of these proceedings an impleading application was filed at the hands of certain persons who claim to be in possession of the lands in question. Formally, the said interlocutory application was allowed while directing that the impleading applicants will be heard in the matter. It is the contention of the said newly impleading respondents that they are in possession of the lands in question and therefore, the names of the petitioners should not be entered in the revenue records. Learned Counsel for the newly impleaded respondents submits that although the said respondents have no title over the lands in question, they have been in possession through their predecessors from the year 1926. - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38312 WP No. 7511 of 2025 8. Learned Additional Government Advocate on the other hand submits that since subsequently proceedings have been initiated by the Special Deputy Commissioner invoking the suo-motu powers under Section 136(3) of the Act, the petitioners may be directed to await the outcome of the said proceedings. It is also submitted that the State Government has now taken a decision to challenge the judgment and decree passed by the Civil Court. On the other hand, the newly impleaded respondents have filed appeals in R.A.Nos.41/2025 and 42/2025 raising a challenge to the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.715/1996 and O.S.No.716/1996 . 9. Having heard the learned Senior Counsel Sri.Srivatsa, appearing for the petitioners, learned Counsel Sri.Nishcal Dev, appearing for respondents No.6 to 19, learned Additional Government Advocate and on perusing the petition papers, this Court is of the considered opinion that in the earlier writ petition this Court has already rendered a finding that there is a declaration by a - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38312 WP No. 7511 of 2025 competent Civil Court in favour of the petitioners while also permanently injuncting the State and its Revenue Authorities from interfering with the peaceful possession over the lands in question. That being so, the petitioners have a right to have their names entered in the revenue records in terms of Sections 128 and 129 of the Act, in view of the declaration made at the hands of the competent Civil Court in O.S.No.715/1996 and O.S.No.716/1996. 10. In that view of the matter, this Court proceeds to pass the following order: ORDER (i) The writ petition stands disposed of with a specific direction to respondent No.3- Tahsildar, Bengaluru South Taluk and respondent No.2-Assistant Commissioner, Bengaluru South Sub-Division, Bengaluru to proceed to enter the names of the petitioners in the revenue records in terms of the - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38312 WP No. 7511 of 2025 judgment and decree passed by the Civil Court in O.S.No.715/1996 and O.S.No.716/1996, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. (ii) The proceedings initiated by the Special Deputy Commissioner in R.P.No.224/2024 being clearly in violation of the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.49738/2016 and in violation of the judgment and decree passed by the Civil Court in O.S.No.715/1996 and O.S.No.716/1996, the proceedings in R.P.No.224/2024 taken up by the Special Deputy Commissioner and all further proceedings thereto, are quashed and set aside. (iii) Needless to observe that if respondents No.6 to 19 or the State Government succeed in - 15 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38312 WP No. 7511 of 2025 getting the judgment and decree set aside in a manner known to law, then the names of the petitioners shall be removed from the revenue records. Until then, the names of the petitioners shall be entered in the revenue records and be continued in accordance with law. Ordered accordingly. 13. Pending Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand disposed of. Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE DL CT:VC