- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26214 WP No. 10315 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO. 10315 OF 2024 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. PUTTAIAH S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, R/AT HOSAPALYA KENGERI HOBLI, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. SUSHEELA S., SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI. PRADEEP H.S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M S BUILDING BENGALURU - 560001 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT K G ROAD, BENGALURU - 560009. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK, KANDHAYA BHAVANA, K G ROAD BENGALURU - 560009. Digitally signed by SHARMA ANAND CHAYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26214 WP No. 10315 of 2024 4. THE TAHSILDAR BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK, D C COMPOUND BUILDING K G ROAD BENGALURU - 560009. 5. SRI MARAPPA S/OLATE ARASAPPA AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS R/AT NO.3431/D, 7TH MAIN ROAD, BEHIND BMTC GARAGE SUBBANNA GARDEN VIJAYANAGAR BENGALURU - 560040. 6. KRISHNAPA DEAD BY LRS SMT. BHAGYAMMA W/O LATE KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS 7. SRI. LAKKANNA S/O LATE KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS 8. SMT. NAGARATHNAMMA W/O KRISHNAMURTHY D/O LATE KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS RESPONDENTS NO.6 TO 8 ARE R/AT NO.10/3, HOSAGUDDAHALLI, F CROSS, MYSORE ROAD, BENGALURU - 560026. 9. SMT. VENKATALAKSHMI @ LAKSHMI W/O VENKATESH D/O LATE KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26214 WP No. 10315 of 2024 10. SMT. ARASAMMA @ YASHODA W/O MUNIRAJ D/O LATE KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS HINDU RESPONDENTS NO. 9 & 10 ARE R/AT SANJEEVANAGAR BENGALURU - 560094. 11. SRI. HARISHA S/O LATE KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS HINDU 12. SRI. DHANANJAYA S/O LATE KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS HINDU RESPONDETNS NO. 11 & 12 ARE R/AT NO.10/3 HOSAGUDDAHALLI, F CROSS, MYSORE ROAD, BENGALURU - 560026. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SIDDHARTH BABURAO, AGA FOR R1 TO R4; SRI. T.C. SATHISH KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R5 TO R12) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 07/03/2024 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 / THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU IN RP NO.311/2014-15 AT ANNEXURE-A. CONSEQUENTLY CONFIRM THE ORDER DATED PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 / THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK, BENGALURU IN RA NO. RA(S)56/2013-14 (ANNEXURE-N). DATED 28.10.2024. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26214 WP No. 10315 of 2024 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER 1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. 2. In this writ petition, petitioner is assailing the order dated 07.03.2024 in R.P.No.311/2014-15 (Annexure-A) passed by respondent No.2, consequently seeking confirmation of the order dated 28.10.2014 passed by respondent No.3 in R.A.(S)No.56/2013-14 (Annexure-N). 3. Smt. S. Susheela, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner invited the attention of the Court to the partition said to have been effected in the family of the original propositus Sri. Balaiah, under which the subject land bearing Sy.No.173/1 has fallen to the share of Sri. Muniyappa (father of the petitioner herein) and which is the subject matter of this writ petition. It is further contended by learned Senior Counsel by referring to the family tree at Annexure-E that all the children of Balaiah are entitled for 31 guntas each, in respect of the total extent of land belonging to Balaiah and therefore, the respondents have no right in respect of the 31 guntas of land - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26214 WP No. 10315 of 2024 which has fallen to the share of father of the petitioner herein, and therefore, submitted that respondent No.2 without considering the subject matter of the land bearing Sy.No.173/1A, has interfered with the order passed by respondent No.3 and accordingly, sought for interference of this Court. 4. It is also contended by the learned Senior Counsel by referring to the proceedings in O.S.No.814/2024 wherein the declaration suit is pending consideration before the Trial Court and therefore, sought for interference of this Court. 5. Per contra, Sri. T.C. Sathish Kumar, learned counsel representing respondent Nos.5 to 12, submitted that the land in question in the present writ petition has been claimed by the petitioner based on a compromise decree between the petitioner and Smt. Arasamma before respondent No.4 and therefore, he contended that, irrespective of the alienation made by said Arasamma in favour of the petitioner herein, unless the execution of the registered release deed has been made to that effect, the petitioner cannot claim any right over - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26214 WP No. 10315 of 2024 the property and accordingly, he submitted that the matter is of civil nature. 6. Learned Additional Government Advocate sought to justify the impugned orders at Annexures - A and N to the Writ Petition. 7. In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, on careful examination of the partition deed produced at Annexure-D and also by looking into Annexure-F2, wherein the land bearing Sy.No.173/1 to an extent of 32 guntas has been allotted in favour of Puttaiah, S/o Muniyappa. In the backdrop of these aspects, on careful examination of the order passed by respondent No.3 at Annexure-N would indicate that since the land has been allotted in favour of said Muniyappa, the mutation entry has to be made in favour of said Puttaiah pursuant to the partition deed referred to at Annexure-D. In that view of the matter, on careful consideration of the order passed by respondent No.2 would make it clear that nothing has been discussed by respondent No.2 with regard to Sy.No.173/1 in the impugned order by giving reasons. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26214 WP No. 10315 of 2024 9. In that view of the matter, I find force in the submission made by learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner that Annexure-A dated 07.03.2024 issued by respondent No.2 is required to be set aside and order passed by respondent No.3 at Annexure-N has to be confirmed. However, taking into consideration that rights of the parties is yet to be considered in O.S. No.814/2024 pending on the file of Prl. Senior Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural Court, I am of the view that, parties are required to await the judgment and decree that may be passed by the Trial Court, therein. 10. In view of the above, order dated 07.03.2024 in R.P.No.311/2014-15 (Annexure-A) passed by respondent No.2, is hereby set aside and the order dated 28.10.2014 passed by respondent No.3 in R.A.(S)No.56/2013-14 (Annexure-N), is hereby confirmed. 11. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands allowed. I.A.1/2024 does not survive for consideration. SD/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE sac List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27