- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31653 WP No. 1041 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 1041 OF 2025 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: SHRI. MELWIN FERNANDES S/O. LATE. IGNATIUS FERNANDES AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/A KOPPALAMANE, TENKABELLURU VILLAGE, BANTWAL TALUK, D.K. DISTRICT - 574 219. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAVISHANKAR SHASTRY G, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT, MANGALURU, D.K. - 575 001. 2. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER MANGALURU SUB- DIVISION, MANGALURU, D.K. DISTRICT - 575 001. 3. THASILDAR, BANTWAL TALUK BANTWAL, D.K. DISTRICT - 574 219. 4. ASHIK SHETTY S/O. RAMANANDA SHETTY, Digitally signed by JUANITA THEJESWINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31653 WP No. 1041 of 2025 RESIDING AT THENKABELLUR, PANEMANGALORE, BANTWAL TALUK, D.K. DISTRICT - 574 219. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MOHAMMED JAFFAR SHAH, AGA) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 16.07.2024 IN CASE NO. CDS.R.A.P 43/2021 PASSED BY THE DC AND DIST MAGISTRATE, D.K DISTRICT, MANGALURU CERTIFIED COPY OF WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNX-A AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS ORAL ORDER Learned Additional Government Advocate takes notice for respondent Nos. 1 to 3. Notice to respondent No.4 is not necessary for the following reasons. 2. The petitioner is aggrieved of a mutation entry made in M.R.No.H31/2012-13 dated 20.03.2013. The mutation entry was made in favour of respondent No.4 pursuant to a registered gift deed dated 05.02.2013. The petitioner approached the Assistant Commissioner by preferring an appeal - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31653 WP No. 1041 of 2025 under Section 136(2) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, questioning the mutation entry. The appeal was dismissed, and the revision petition filed by the petitioner before the Deputy Commissioner was also dismissed by order dated 16.07.2024. 3. Having regard to the undisputed facts, when it is clear that the mutation entry has been carried out in the year, 2013 on the strength of the registered instrument, it will be a futile exercise on the part of the petitioner to knock the doors of the revenue authorities while contending that the registered gift deed could not have been executed by Sri.Jairam Shetty in favour of respondent No.4. It is trite law that revenue authorities shall not enter upon disputed questions of title. The view of the revenue authorities is that the petitioner will have to approach a competent civil Court to get a declaration of title. 4. In that view of the matter, this Court is of the considered opinion that no fault can be found in the impugned order passed by the Assistant Commissioner as well as the Deputy Commissioner. Accordingly, the writ petition stands - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31653 WP No. 1041 of 2025 dismissed while reserving liberty to the petitioner to approach a competent Civil Court to seek a declaration of title. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that the matter is still pending consideration before the Land Tribunal. Therefore, the learned counsel submits that liberty may also be reserved to the petitioner to approach the revenue authorities if, subsequently, any order is passed by the Land Tribunal in favour of the petitioner. Ordered accordingly. Learned Additional Government Advocate is permitted to file memo of appearance within a period of four weeks from today. Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE rv CT: BHK