Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 66238 (KAR)

KARIYAPPA S/O. ERAPPA KATAGI v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/105315/2025 · 2025-09-19

Suraj Govindaraj

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12685 WP No. 105315 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 105315 OF 2025 (KLR-RR/SUR) BETWEEN: KARIYAPPA S/O. ERAPPA KATAGI, AGE: MAJOR, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. SIDDAPURA VILLAGE, TQ. KARATAGI, DIST. KOPPAL. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. GIRISH V BHAT, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU 560001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, KOPPAL, DIST. KOPPAL 583231. 3. THE SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, KOPPAL 583231. 4. THE TAHASHILDAR DEPARTMENT OF PRE UNIVERSITY EDUCATION, DR. RAJKUMAR ROAD, BALLARI-583101. 5. THE REVENUE INSPECTOR SIDDAPUR VILLAGE, Digitally signed by SAROJA HANGARAKI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12685 WP No. 105315 of 2025 TQ. KARATAGI, DIST. KOPPAL-583231. 6. THE VILLAGE ACCOUNTANT SIDDAPUR VILLAGE, TQ. KARATAGI, DIST. KOPPAL 583231. 7. MOULASAB S/O. MARDAN SAB, AGE: MAJOR, OCC. AGRICULTURE 8. PAMPAPATI S/O. JADEPPA AGE: MAJOR, OCC. AGRICULTURE 9. ROUNDKUNDI KHASIMSAB S/O. DADASAHEB AGE: MAJOR, OCC. AGRICULTURE 10. HUSENSAB S/O. LADLASAB ALIAS KHAJAHUSEN AGE: MAJOR, OCC. AGRICULTURE 11. RAMALISAB S/O. FEERASAB AGE: MAJOR, OCC. AGRICULTURE 12. SHABINA BEGUM W/O. LATE MOHAMADSAB @ MAHAMADALI, AGE: MAJOR,, OCC. AGRICULTURE, (RESPONDENT NO.7 TO 12 ARE ALL R/O. SIDDAPURA VILLAGE TA. KARATAGI DIST. KOPPAL-583231) …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. T. HANUMAREDDY, AGA FOR R1 TO R6; NOTICE TO R7 TO R12 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO I. ISSUE A WRIT OR A DIRECTION OR AN APPROPRIATE ORDER IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI, QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT IN RRT/APPEALU/105/2023 DATED 29.06.2024 VIDE ANNEXURE-M TO THE WRIT PETITION.II. ISSUE A WRIT OR A DIRECTION OR AN APPROPRIATE ORDER IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI, QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT BEARING NO.KAM/APPEALU/56/2024-25 DATED 23.04.2025 VIDE - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12685 WP No. 105315 of 2025 ANNEXURE-N TO THE WRIT PETITION. III. PASS SUCH OTHER ORDERS AND GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEFS DEEMED FIT AND PROPER IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) 1. Learned AGA accepts notice for respondent Nos.1 to 6. 2. Notice to respondent nos.7 to 12 is dispensed with in view of the proposed order to be passed. 3. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: i. Issue a Writ or a direction or an appropriate order in the nature of certiorari, quashing the impugned order passed by the 3rd respondent in RRT/APPEALU/105/2023 dated 29.06.2024 vide Annexure-M to the writ petition. ii. Issue a Writ or a direction or an appropriate order in the nature of certiorari, quashing the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent bearing no.KAM/APPEALU/56/2024-25 dated 23.04.2025 vide Annexure-N to the writ petition. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12685 WP No. 105315 of 2025 iii. Pass such other orders and grant such other reliefs deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity. 4. By way of the impugned orders the name of the petitioner was removed from the revenue records on the ground that there is no registered sale deed in favour of the petitioner. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is in fact a Sale Deed though not registered, the vendor has not disputed the title of the petitioner and therefore the unregistered, inadequately stamped sale deed ought to have been taken into consideration by the respondents. 6. A perusal of the sale deed indicates that the sale consideration is more than ₹100/-. Therefore, in terms of Section 17 of the Indian Registration Act, it was but required for the sale deed to be registered for the petitioner to claim title over the property. The - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12685 WP No. 105315 of 2025 petitioner claiming title under an unregistered Sale Deed, the respondents have rightly allowed the appeal filed by the respondent Nos.7 to 12, no infirmity can be found therewith. 7. The petition stands dismissed reserving liberty to the petitioner to obtain a registered sale deed. 8. IA Nos.1/2025 and 2/2025 are allowed. Production of certified copies of Annexures-M and N and typed copies of Annexures-B and C is dispensed with. Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE Sh Ct:pa List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8