- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34688-DB WA No. 123 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K WRIT APPEAL NO. 123 OF 2024 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: SMT. ANJINAMMA, WIFE OF LATE SAMMANDUR MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 81 YEARS, (AS PER ADHAR CARD) RESIDING AT MYLASANDRA VILLAGE BEGUR HOBLI, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK BENGALURU-560 068 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SANGAMESH R.B., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 001, REP BY ITS SECRETARY 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT, BENGALURU - 560 009 3. ASST. COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU SOUTH SUB DIVISION, KANDAYA BHAVAN, BENGALURU - 560 009 Digitally signed by CHANNEGOWDA PREMA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34688-DB WA No. 123 of 2024 4. THE TAHSILDAR, BENGALURU SOUTH SUB DIVISION, KANDAYA BHAVAN, BENGALURU - 560 009 5. YOUSUF SHARIEFF @ BABU SON OF DASTAGIR SHARIEFF No.22/1, MILLER TANK BUND ROAD, CAVERIYAPPA LAYOUT, VASANTHNAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 052 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MADHUKAR NADIG, ADVOCATE FOR THE IMPLEADING APPLICANT ON IA 1/25; SRI. RAJESWARA P.N., ADVOCATE FOR C/R5; SMT. SHWETHA KRISHNAPPA, AGA FOR R1 TO R4.) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO (i) ALLOW THE ABOVE APPEAL (ii) SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 19.12.2023 PASSED IN WRIT PETITION No.17969/2021 (KLR-RES) PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE, SO AS TO ALLOW THE WRIT PETITION AND ETC. THIS WRIT APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34688-DB WA No. 123 of 2024 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN) Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side. 2. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.5 has placed a memo on record for disposal of the appeal producing the confirmation deed executed by the appellant herein in favour of one M/s. Splendid Constructions. 3. Having considered the contentions advanced, we are of the opinion that in the light of the confirmation deed executed by the appellant, the appellant has no subsisting right in the subject property and therefore, the memo of disposal filed by respondent No.5 is accepted. 4. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed in the light of the memo filed by respondent No.5. Sd/- (ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE Sd/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE PN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 66