- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45337 WP No. 11298 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 11298 OF 2024 (GM-ST/RN) BETWEEN: 1. SRI NAVEEN KUMAR RAMACHANDRAN, S/O RAMACHANDRAN B, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS. 2. SMT. MADHU NAVEEN KUMAR, W/O NAVEEN KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS. BOTH ARE RESIDING AT NO.86, 10TH CROSS ROAD, RBI LAYOUT, JP NAGAR 7TH PHASE, BANGALORE-560078. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI HIRAN KRISHNASWAMY, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, ROOM NO. 627, 6TH FLOOR, GATE-1, M S BUILDING, DR B R AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE-560001. 2. THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR, NO. 4, OLD NO. 622/623, 3RD FLOOR, 10TH A MAIN ROAD, 4TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BANGALORE-560 011. 3. THE SUB REGISTRAR, Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45337 WP No. 11298 of 2024 8, ANJANAURA MAIN RD, AMRUTH NAGAR, ANJANADRI LAYOUT, KONANAKUNTE, BENGALURU KARNATAKA-560 062. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. K.P YASHODHA, AGA FOR R-1 TO R-3) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT AUTHORITIES TO CONSIDER THE PETITIONER'S REPRESENTATION DATED 25.05.2023, COPY AS PER ANNEXURE-K AND REPRESENTATION DATED 04.07.2023, COPY AS PER ANNEXURE- L(COLLY) ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs; a. "Issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondent Authorities to consider the Petitioners' representation dated 25.05.2023, copy as per Annexure-K; and representation dated 04.07.2023, copy as per Annexure-L(Colly.). b. Issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents to refund a sum of Rs.5,20,675/- (Rs. Five Lakhs, Twenty Thousand, Six Hundred and Seventy Five Only) being the stamp duty paid on sale deed dated 26.03.2022, (Annexure B) that came to be cancelled. c. Issue such other Order or Orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit, in the interest of justice and equity." - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45337 WP No. 11298 of 2024 2. A sale deed having been executed in favour of the petitioner in respect of Plot No.36 situated in Kothnur Village, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk, Bangalore, stamp duty and registration fee thereon had been paid by the petitioners. The petitioners were put in possession of the said plot and had built small shop premises on same, obtained electricity connection from BESCOM and let out the shop for rent. 3. When they were in such possession, one person by name Sri.M.V.Ganeshan had come forward claiming title over the property. In pursuance of which, the petitioner had filed a complaint against him in Konankunte Police Station, when it was found the petitioner had purchased the schedule property from an impersonator of the owner. In pursuance of which the petitioner had filed a complaint in Crime No.276 of 2022. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45337 WP No. 11298 of 2024 4. Investigation having been done, charge sheet has also been laid in the said proceedings and numbered as CC No.36828 of 2022 for offences under Section 417, 419, 420, 465, 471, 120(B) read with Section 34 of the IPC. 5. The said Sri.M.V.Ganeshan had filed suit in O.S.No.7952/2022 seeking for a declaration of sale deed executed in favour of petitioner has null and void and not binding on it. In the said suit, the petitioner entered into compromise on 28.02.2023 relinquishing the rights of the petitioner in favour of Sri.M.V.Ganeshan. 6. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner had made representation to the respondents on 25.05.2023 seeking for refund of stamp duty paid on the sale deed which had been cancelled/nullified by way of the aforesaid compromise. The said representation not having been acted upon the petitioner is before this Court. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45337 WP No. 11298 of 2024 7. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that once a sale deed has been cancelled, it is but required for the respondent-State to refund the stamp duty and registration fee which has been charged by them. 8. I am unable to agree with the said submission of learned counsel for the petitioner in the present matter for the simple reason that in the present matter, there is no adjudication by any Court as regards the dispute; it is a compromise which has been entered into between the petitioner and the respondent, resulting in the sale deed being set aside. 9. The petitioner, having already filed a suit for recovery of the consideration paid under the said sale deed, could as well seek for further recovery of the registration fee and stamp duty in the said proceedings, against the persons who had defrauded the petitioner. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45337 WP No. 11298 of 2024 10. The matter would have been different if there had been an adjudication by the Court, where the Court had come to the conclusion that the sale deed that was executed was null and void and therefore cancelled the said sale deed. 11. On the basis of the compromise the petitioner cannot claim for the refund of the stamp duty and registration fee, the same as indicated supra can be recovered in the suit filed by the petitioner. 12. With the above observation, the petition stands dismissed. SD/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE SR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 44