- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6655 WP No. 105184 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M.G.UMA WRIT PETITION NO. 105184 OF 2024 (KLR-RR/SUR) BETWEEN: SMT. PARAVVA W/O. FAKKEERAPPA MADALLI, AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: HAVERI. TQ. & DIST. HAVERI. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. N.H.PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001. 2. TAHASILDAR SHIGGAON TQ. SHIGGAON, DIST. HAVERI. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. T. HANUMAREDDY, AGA) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT ANNEXURE- H DATED 16/10/2023 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.2 AND CONSEQUENTLY ISSUE WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT TO ENTER THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER IN THE RECORD OF RIGHTS OF SY.NO 9 TO THE EXTENT OF 16 GUNTA 11 ANNA AND SY.NO.7/1 TO THE EXTENT OF 28 GUNTA 09 ANNA BOTH LANDS SITUATED AT MAMDAPUR VILLAGE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FINAL DECREE DRAWN IN F.D.P. NO.09/2016. Digitally signed by V N BADIGER Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6655 WP No. 105184 of 2024 THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M.G.UMA ORAL ORDER The petitioner has approached this Court seeking issuance of writ in the nature of Certiorari to quash the impugned endorsement dated 16.10.2023, produced as per Annexure-H, issued by respondent No.2 - the Tahsildar, Shiggaon. 2. Heard Sri.N. H. Patil, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.T. Hanumareddy, learned AGA for respondents No.1 and 2. Perused the materials on record. 3. The materials on record disclose that, the petitioner had filed a suit in O.S.No.232/2009, seeking partition and separate possession of the family properties. The suit came to be decreed, and it has reached finality. The petitioner subsequently filed F.D.P.No.9/2016 requesting the Trial Court to draw the final decree. The Court Commissioner was appointed to measure and report - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6655 WP No. 105184 of 2024 regarding drawing up of the final decree. Accordingly, the Court Commissioner visited the spot. 4. The Court Commissioner, who is none other than the Taluka Surveyor, measured the properties in question and submitted his report along with the sketch. The Trial Court passed the final decree based on the Commissioner’s report and the survey sketch. 5. The petitioner has submitted an application to mutate his name in the record of rights on the basis of the final decree. Respondent No.2, instead of mutating the name on the basis of the final decree drawn by the Civil Court, on the basis of the survey report and the survey sketch drawn by the Taluka Surveyor, issued the impugned endorsement dated 16.10.2023, produced as per Annexure-H. As per Annexure-H, the application filed by the petitioner was disposed of for want of 11-E sketch. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of the Court to the decision of the Division - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6655 WP No. 105184 of 2024 Bench of this Court in The State of Karnataka and Others Vs. Sri. Krishnegowda1. The Division Bench, considering the similar contentions in the said case, upheld the order of the learned Single Judge, who had quashed similar endorsement issued by the respondent requiring 11-E sketch and held that, when the survey number of the land, the khata number, the measurements, the extent of the land, the place where the land is situated along with its boundaries, are all available in the decree, and when the description in the plaint schedule as well as in the conveyance document are sufficient to identify the land in question, the respondent therein was not right in issuing the endorsement. Therefore, it was held that the learned Single Judge was justified in quashing the endorsement impugned in the said case. The Division Bench of this Court also upheld the direction issued by the learned Single Judge, directing registration of the sale deed 1 W.A.No.49 of 2021 dated 23.02.2021 - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6655 WP No. 105184 of 2024 presented by the Court Commissioner in the Execution Case pursuant to the decree passed by the Trial Court. 7. In the present case, the final decree was admittedly drawn on the basis of the Commissioner’s report, who is none other than the Taluka Surveyor, who measured the property and submitted the report and the sketch. The details found in the final decree were sufficient to identify the property in question. 8. Under such circumstances, I do not find any justification for respondent No.2 to issue the endorsement as per Annexure-H. Therefore, the same is liable to be quashed. 9. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6655 WP No. 105184 of 2024 ii. Impugned endorsement dated 16.10.2023 issued by respondent No.2, produced as per Annexure-H, is quashed. iii. Respondent No.2 is directed to enter the name of the petitioner in the record of rights on the basis of the final decree drawn by the Civil Court. Sd/- (M.G.UMA) JUDGE gab CT:ANB List No.: 2 Sl No.: 18