- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41862 WP No. 599 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 599 OF 2025 (LB-BMP) BETWEEN: SMT. GANGALAKSHMAMMA W/O. LATE ANANTHARAMU AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS R/AT NO.205, 14TH CROSS NELAGADARANAHALLI YESHWANTHAPURA HOBLI BENGALURU NORTH TALUK BENGALURU-560 073. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. CHANDRASHEKAR P., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE COMMISSIONER BBMP, N.R. SQUARE BENGALURU-560 002. 2. THE ASSISTANT REVENUE OFFICER PEENYA INDUSTRIAL AREA HMT LAYOUT, NAGASANDRA, BENGALURU-560 073. 3. THE REVENUE INSPECTOR BBMP, PEENYA INDUSTRIAL AREA HMT LAYOUT, NAGASANDRA, BENGALURU-560 073. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MALLIKARJUN REDDY K S.,ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41862 WP No. 599 of 2025 RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 12/07/2024 GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER TO THE R2. THE COPIES OF WHICH ARE PRODUCED HEREWITH AND MARKED AS ANNEXURES-D, D1, D2, D3, D4 , D5 AND D6 TO THE WP. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ ORAL ORDER The petitioner has sought for a writ in the nature of mandamus to direct the respondents to consider the representation dated 12.07.2024 given by the petitioner requesting to enter her name in the property tax register. 2. The petitioner contends that she is the widow of Late.Anantharamu and daughter-in-law of Late.Hanumaiah. She contends that there was a partition in the year 1989 between Hanumaiah and his children. Her husband was allotted properties that were described in the schedule to the deed of partition as Schedule 'F' properties. She claims that one Chandrashekar @ Chandrappa had acquired the following: (i) Property bearing Site No.2, Khatha No.1231, Assessment No.123/1, No. (ii) Khaneshumari/Site No. 1, Khatha No. 241. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41862 WP No. 599 of 2025 3. (i) She contends that her husband predeceased Chandrashekar @ Chandrappa and since the latter had no children, he and his wife were taken care of by the petitioner and her children. The said Chandrashekar had executed a will dated 21.01.2021 bequeathing the aforementioned properties in favour of the son of the petitioner. The petitioner contends that the will was attested by a witness named Sri.Thimmegowda and that after the death of Chandrashekar, the said Sri.Thimmegowda handed over a copy of the will to the son of the petitioner. The will was then placed before the Sub- registrar, who registered it in accordance with law. (ii) The petitioner claims that her son executed a gift deed dated 04.07.2024 in her favour, which was duly registered. Later, she approached the respondent No.2 requesting him to enter her name in the municipal records. The petitioner contends that the said representations are not considered till date and therefore, she is before this Court seeking for a direction to the respondents to consider her representation and enter her name in the khatha. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41862 WP No. 599 of 2025 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the above contentions and submitted that the petitioner being the present owner of the property, is entitled to get her name entered in the municipal records. He therefore prays that the respondents may be directed to consider the representations and enter her name in the records. 5. The writ petition is opposed by the respondent Nos.1 to 3, who contend that after the petitioner submitted a representation, one Smt.Jayalakshmi being the wife of Chandrashekar, submitted an objection on 25.09.2024 against transferring the name of the petitioner in the municipal records. In view of the above, the respondent No.2 issued an endorsement dated 20.12.2024, to the petitioner directing her to approach the civil Court. Along with the statement of objections filed by respondent Nos.1 to 3, the endorsement dated 20.12.2024 is placed on record. The learned counsel for the respondents submitted that in view of the objection raised, the respondents are not in a position to enter the name of the petitioner. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41862 WP No. 599 of 2025 6. The petitioner claims title through her son Niranjan, who purportedly was a beneficiary of a will executed by Chandrashekar. The municipal records of the property stood in the name of Chandrashekar. The wife of Chandrasekhar has now lodged an objection against registering the name of the petitioner in the municipal records on the ground that her husband had not executed a will in favour of Niranjan. If that be so, the respondents cannot adjudicate upon the validity of the will. Consequently, the respondents were right in directing the petitioner to approach the civil Court. In this regard, it is profitable to refer to the judgment of a Full Bench of this Court in the case of CN Nagendra Singh vs. The Special Deputy Commissioner - ILR 2002 KAR 2750. 7. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed off on the above terms. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE BKN/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 38