- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51132 WP No. 41373 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K WRIT PETITION NO. 41373 OF 2017 (LR) BETWEEN: CHANDAN S/O.LATE GANGADHARA, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.307, BINDU AMULYA APARTMENT MUDDINAPALYA MAIN ROAD, ANJANAPURA, VISHWANEEDAM POST, BANGALORE - 560 091. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. N.R. NAIK, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT & CHAIRMAN LAND TRIBUNAL, NELAMANGALA TALUK, BENGALURU DISTRICT - 562 123. 2. C R GANGADHARA S/O. LATE RAMACHANDRA NAIK, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS R/A.594, 9TH C MAIN, 6TH CROSS, RPC LAYOUT, VIJAYANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 040. 3. NARAYANA NAIK S/O.LATE RAMACHANDRA NAIK, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/A.NO.33, I FLOOR, 5TH MAIN, A D HALLI, BENGALURU - 560 079. Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51132 WP No. 41373 of 2017 4. CHANDRASHEKARA NAIK S/O.LATE RAMACHANDRA NAIK, PRESENTLY AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/A.594, 9TH MAIN, 6TH CROSS, RPC LAYOUT, VIJAYANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 040. 5. SMT SHANTA BAI D/O.LATE RAMACHANDRA NAIK, W/O.RAJENDRA NAIK, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/A.1305, BHARATHI NAGAR, BEL LAYOUT II STAGE, 5TH CROSS, BENGALURU - 560 091. 6. SMT LAKSHMI BAI W/O.LATE RAMACHANDRA NAIK, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS 7. MOHAN S/O.LATE RAMACHANDRA NAIK, PRESENTLY AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS 8. VINODH KUMAR S/O.LATE RAMACHANDRA NAIK, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS RESPONDENTS 6, 7 AND 8 RESIDING AT CHIKKATORE VILLAGE, BACHENAHATTI POST, MAGADI TALUK, BENGALURU - 561 201. 9. SMT. PANKAJA D/O LATE L. GANGADHARA, R/A.232/9, 3RD Y BLOCK, 14TH MAIN RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 010. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51132 WP No. 41373 of 2017 10. LOKESH NAIK S/O.LATE L GANGADHARA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/A.31, FOYER APARTMENTS, 21ST CROSS, SRI MV NAGAR, T C PALYA MAIN ROAD, RAMAMURTHYNAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 016. 11. SMT NITYA W/O.NAVEEN NAIK, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS 12. HARSHITHA S/O LATE NAVEEN NAIK, PRESENTLY AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS 13. RAKSHITHA S/O LATE NAVEEN NAIK, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS RESPONDENTS 11, 12 AND 13 RESIDING AT NO.1263, KHB COLONY BUS STOP, MAGADI MAIN ROAD, AMARAVATHI HOTEL BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 072. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAHUL CARIAPPA K.S., AGA FOR R1) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDERS DTD:28.11.2016 AT ANNEXURE-B PASSED BY THE LEARNED KARNATAKA APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN APPEAL 608/2003 AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51132 WP No. 41373 of 2017 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K ORAL ORDER In this writ petition, the petitioner has sought for writ of certiorari to quash the order dated 28.11.2016 at Annexure-B, passed by respondent No.1, the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal (for brevity 'KAT') in Appeal No.608/2003. 2. The grievance of the petitioner is that, one Muniya, son of Soma was the owner of the land measuring 3 acres 30 guntas in Honnasandra Village, Nelamangala Taluk (for brevity, "the subject land") and the same was being cultivated by one Lachama alias Lachmanaik, i.e., the grandfather of the petitioner till his death i.e., till the year 1993. Thereafter, the father of the petitioner continued to be in cultivation of the said land. After introduction of Section 77-A of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961, (for brevity 'the KLR Act'), petitioner's father filed Form No.7A for registration of occupancy rights - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51132 WP No. 41373 of 2017 in respect of the subject land before the Land Tribunal, Magadi. Later, the Land Tribunal, Magadi has transferred the petition to the Land Tribunal, Nelamangala in 7A proceedings i.e., LRF (HNS) 04/1999-2000. The petitioner's father participated in the proceedings before the Land Tribunal, Nelamangala and granted occupancy rights in respect of subject land in favour of the petitioner's father. The said order has been challenged by the legal representatives of the landlord Muniya before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal (KAT) in Appeal No.608/2003. The KAT has allowed the appeal by setting aside the order passed by the Land Tribunal, Nelamangala, on the ground that the petitioner's father has failed to place the relevant RTC extracts standing in his name as on 01.03.1974 and they failed to establish that the land vested with the Government. The challenge to the same is the lis before this Court. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51132 WP No. 41373 of 2017 3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, so also the learned Additional Government Advocate. 4. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that in view of transfer of LRF case from the Land Tribunal, Magadi to the Land Tribunal, Nelamangala and due to the death of the grandfather of the petitioner, they were unable to place the documents i.e. relevant RTC extract and other documents to substantiate that they were tenants in cultivation of the subject land as on 01.03.1974 and he submitted that, if an opportunity is extended to him, he would be able to place all the relevant documents before the Land Tribunal to prove his claim. 5. The learned AGA has opposed the petition on the ground that, despite granting sufficient opportunity, the petitioner has failed to place the relevant documents before the Tribunal. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51132 WP No. 41373 of 2017 6. I have carefully perused the impugned order passed by the KAT. As could be gathered from the impugned order, the KAT has set aside the order of the Land Tribunal primarily on the ground that the name of the petitioner's father in the RTC extract was entered from the year 1993-94 onwards till the year 2000 and in the said RTC, entries in column number 12(2) depicts that the nature of possession of land by Lachma, i.e., grandfather of the petitioner as "own" (swantha) and not as Genidhar. Further, the petitioner's father had failed to produce the RTC extracts for the relevant year as on 01.03.1974. Now, the petitioner submits if an opportunity is extended, he is able to produce the RTC since he is in possession of the same. As such, in my considered view, the matter requires re-consideration at the hands of the Land Tribunal, Nelamangala. Accordingly, I pass the following: ORDER i. The Writ Petition is allowed. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51132 WP No. 41373 of 2017 ii. The impugned order dated 28.11.2016 passed by KAT in Appeal No.608/2003 vide Annexure-B and impugned order dated 11.04.2003 passed by respondent No.1 - Deputy Commissioner at Annexure-A are quashed. iii. The matter is remitted back to the Land Tribunal, Nelamangala for fresh consideration. iv. The Land Tribunal, Nelamangala shall consider the claim of the petitioner by extending an opportunity to the petitioner and respondent Nos.2 to 13 i.e., legal representatives of late Muniya. v. All contentions are left open. vi. Both the parties are permitted to place all the relevant documents before the Land Tribunal, Nelamangala. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51132 WP No. 41373 of 2017 vii. Till the conclusion of the proceedings, the parties shall maintain status-quo in respect of possession of the subject land. Sd/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE GPG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11