- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31143 WP No. 35124 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 35124 OF 2024 (KLR-RR/SUR) BETWEEN: RUDRANAIK S/O LATE THAKRYA NAIK AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS R/O EACHAGHATTA VILLAGE, MAYOKONDA HOBLI, DAVANAGERE TQ-577534 DAVANAGERE DISTRICT (BENEFIT OF SENIOR CITIZEN NOT CLAIMED) …PETITIONER (BY SRI. HALLI SHANTAPPA BASAPPA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DAVANAGERE DISTRICT DAVANAGERE-577001 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER DAVANAGERE SUB DIVISION DAVANAGERE-577001 Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31143 WP No. 35124 of 2024 3. THE TAHASILDAR DAVANAGERE DAVANAGERE TALUKA-577001 4. H G JAGADISH S/O LATE SADASHIVAPPA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/O HANUMANAHALLI VILLAGE DAVANAGERE TQ-577224 DAVANAGERE DISTRICT 5. H G MALLIKARJUNA S/O LATE SADASHIVAPPA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/O HANUMANAHALLI VILLAGE DAVANAGERE TQ-577224 DAVANAGERE DISTRICT …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SESHU V., HCGP FOR R1 TO R3) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A) QUASH THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO3 IN CASE BEARING NO RRT(L)/CR 110/2024- 25 DATED 16/11/2024 VIDE ANNEXURE-H, AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31143 WP No. 35124 of 2024 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS ORAL ORDER Learned High Court Government Pleader takes notice for respondent Nos.1 to 3. Notice to respondent Nos.4 and 5 is not necessary for the following reasons. 2. The grievance of the petitioner is directed towards the impugned endorsement at Annexure - H issued by the Tahasildar, Davanagere Taluk declining to enter the name of the petitioner in the revenue records. It is the contention of the petitioner that his father late Sri.Thakrya Naik purchased 2 acres and 33 guntas of land in Sy.No.61/2 situated at Kaluru Village, Lokikere Hobli, Davanagere Taluk under registered sale deed dated 05.08.1971. However, it is admitted that the father of the petitioner never got his name entered in the revenue records. The petitioner approached the Tahasildar seeking entry of his name in the revenue records. When the same was declined, the petitioner had earlier filed an appeal before the Assistant Commissioner, Davanagere Sub-Division in R.A/CR/68/2020-21. The Assistant Commissioner passed an - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31143 WP No. 35124 of 2024 order on 18.07.2022 rejecting the appeal. However, in the Revision Petition filed by the petitioner before the Deputy Commissioner, Davanagere District, the Deputy Commissioner while disposing of the Revision Petition on 02.08.2024 at Annexure - E, set aside the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner while directing the Tahasildar to look into the records that would be produced by the petitioner, issue notice to all concerned and thereafter, pass necessary order in accordance with the provisions of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964. Pursuant to the same, the impugned endorsement has been issued by the Tahasildar declining the register the name of the petitioner in the revenue records on the ground that the private respondents herein have divided the property amongst themselves in a partition deed and further a suit is filed by the private respondents herein in O.S.No.705/2024, which is pending consideration before the learned Civil Judge and J.M.F.C., Davanagere. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the suit filed by the private respondents herein is only for permanent injunction and not for declaration. It is contended - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31143 WP No. 35124 of 2024 that when it is not disputed by the private respondents herein that the petitioner's father purchased the land under a registered sale deed dated 05.08.1971, the name of the petitioner is required to be entered in terms of Section 128 and 129 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act. 4. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perusing the petition papers, this Court is of the considered opinion that the admitted position is that although the petitioner's father is said to have purchased the land in question in the year 1971, nevertheless he did not get his name entered in the revenue records. More than 45 years have lapsed pursuant to the execution of the sale deed and at this juncture, it would not be permissible for the Revenue Authorities to consider the grievance of the petitioner, having regard to the admitted fact that revenue entries have been mutated in the name of the private respondents herein pursuant to the partition deeds. At any rate, the law laid down by this Court is that the Revenue Authorities will not be permitted to go into disputed questions of title. The aggrieved - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31143 WP No. 35124 of 2024 person is required to approach a Competent Civil Court to get a declaration of title. 5. In that view of the matter, the writ petition stands disposed of reserving liberty to the petitioner to approach a Competent Civil Court and get a declaration of title in his favour. 6. Learned High Court Government Pleader is permitted to file Memo of Appearance within a period of four weeks from today. Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE KG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19