- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:8013 WP No. 3083 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO.3083 OF 2025 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: SRI.MUNIRAJU C S/O LATE CHANNARAYAPPA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS RESIDING AT MUDUGURKI VILLAGE VIJAYPURA HOBLI DEVANAHALLI TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562110. …PETITIONER (BY SRI.KRISHNA GOWDA B, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT DISTRICT OFFICE COMPLEX BEERASANDRA VILLAGE DEVANAHALLI TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562110 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER DODDABALLAPUR SUB-DIVISION DODDABALLAPURA 561203 3. THE TAHSILDAR DEVANAHALLI TALUK Digitally signed by CHAITHRA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:8013 WP No. 3083 of 2025 DEVANAHALLI TOWN DEVANAHALLI - 562110. 4. SMT.MUNIRATHNAMMA W/O LATE DODDAMUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS RESIDING AT MUDGURKI VILLAGE VIJAYPURA HOBLI DEVANAHALLI TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562110. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.B.P.RADHA, AGA) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT - DEPUTY COMMISSIONER IN REV PETITION NO.20/2023 DATED 28.05.2024 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER This writ petition is filed assailing the order dated 28.05.2024 passed by respondent No.1 - Deputy Commissioner, who has reversed the order of respondent Nos.2 and respondent No.3. Respondent No.2 and 3 have acted upon the unregistered Partition Deed on which the - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:8013 WP No. 3083 of 2025 petitioner is placing reliance and mutations were effected by respondent No.3 - Tahasildar and confirmed by respondent No.2 - Assistant Commissioner. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA. Perused the records. 3. The records reveal that the petition land was originally granted to respondent No.4's husband namely Doddamuniyappa vide order dated 08.08.1996. Pursuant to the grant, respondent No.4's husband name was duly mutated to the RTC pertaining to the petition land. 4. The said original grantee Doddamuniyappa died on 23.05.2003. Respondent No.4/widow of Doddamuniyappa, submitted an application to mutate her name as a sole surviving Class-I heir. At this juncture, it appears that the petitioner placing reliance on the unregistered Partition Deed, which is evidenced at Annexure-B contested widow’s request seeking inheritance khata. Respondent No.3 - Tahasildar accepting the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:8013 WP No. 3083 of 2025 unregistered Partition Deed has effected the mutation in terms of the shares indicated in the said document. The said order is confirmed by respondent No.2 - Assistant Commissioner. Respondent No.1 - Deputy Commissioner has reversed the order and has set-aside the order of respondent No.2 - Assistant Commissioner and respondent No.3 - Tahasildar and directed respondent No.3 - Tahasildar to effect inheritance katha in favour of respondent No.4. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner fairly concedes that the petitioner has instituted a partition suit and the same is pending before the competent Civil Court. The petitioner based on the unregistered Partition Deed cannot assert his right under mutation proceedings. The unregistered Partition Deed cannot be looked into and therefore, respondent No.1 - Deputy Commissioner was justified in setting aside the order of respondent No.3 - Tahasildar and confirmed by respondent No.2 - Assistant Commissioner. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:8013 WP No. 3083 of 2025 6. Be that as it may, the petitioner has already approached the competent Civil Court seeking relief of partition and separate possession. The burden is on the petitioner to demonstrate that the grant made in favour of Doddamuniyappa was on behalf of the family member. Unless the said burden is discharged before the competent Civil Court, the petitioner's claim based on the unregistered Partition Deed cannot be entertained in the mutation proceedings. Respondent No.1 - Deputy Commissioner's order clearly aligns with the mandate provided under Section 128 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act. Reserving liberty to the petitioner to substantiate his right before the competent Civil Court, the captioned writ petition stands dismissed. SD/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE NBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6