- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4711 WP No. 65261 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M.G.UMA WRIT PETITION NO. 65261 OF 2011 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. MARUTI S/O. APPANNA KHOT, AGE: 70 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: BORAGAON, TQ: CHIKKODI - 591 201, DIST: BELGAUM. 2. SRI. SIDRAM S/O. APPANNA KHOT, AGE: 68 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, 3. SRI. BAPU S/O. APPANNA KHOT, AGE: 65 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, 4. SRI. SHIVAJI S/O. APPANNA KHOT, AGE: 59 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, 5. SRI. SHANKAR S/O. APPANNA KHOT, AGE: 53 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, 6. SRI. GANAPATI S/O. VITHAL KHOT, BY HIS L.RS SMT. SHREYASI W/O. GANAPATI KHOT, AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, 7. SRI. PARAGOUDA S/O. VITHAL KHOT, AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, 8. SRI. PANDURANG S/O. GANAPATI KHOT, AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, 9. SRI. NAMADEV S/O. GANAPATI KHOT, AGE: 47 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, Digitally signed by V N BADIGER Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4711 WP No. 65261 of 2011 10. SRI. MALLU S/O. ANNU KHOT, AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, 11. SRI. BABASOS S/O. ANNU KHOT, AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, 12. SRI. MANGAL S/O. TATYASO KHOT, AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, 13. SRI. PUNDALIK S/O. BANDU KHOT, AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, 14. SRI. DATTATRAYA S/O. BANDU KHOT, AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, 15. SRI. ANAND S/O. BANDU KHOT, AGE: 34 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, 16. SRI. SURESH S/O. MALLU KHOT, AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, 17. SRI. RAJENDRA S/O. MALLU KHOT, AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, 18. RAVINDRA S/O. MALLU KHOT, AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, 19. DASHARATH S/O. MAHADEV KHOT, AGE: 33 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, ALL ARE R/O: BORAGAON, TQ: CHIKKODI - 591 201, DIST: BELGAUM. …PETITIONERS (BY MISS VINUTA M. KHANNUR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. MADANMOHAN M. KHANNUR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BELGAUM DISTRICT, BELGAUM - 590 016. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4711 WP No. 65261 of 2011 2. THE TECHNICAL ASSISTANT, TO THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND EX-OFFICIO DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS, BELGAUM AT: BELGAUM - 590 016. 3. THE TAHASILDAR, (LAND SURVEY DEPARTMENT), CHIKKODI - 591 201, DIST: BELGAUM. 4. SRI. RAJARAM S/O. SHIVAPPA ARAGE, AGE: MAJOR (CORRECT AGE NOT KNOWN), OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: SHIVANAYAKWADI, TQ: SHIROL, DIST: KOLHAPUR. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ABHINANDAN HIREMATH, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. G.I. GACHCHINAMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R4; SRI. T. HANUMAREDDY, AGA FOR R1 TO R3) ------- THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 11/11/2010 IN NO.RB.LRAP.PHODI.05/09-10 PASSED BY 1ST RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-D, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND SET ASIDE THE P.T.SHEET AND HISSA FORM NO.4 VIDE ANNEXURE-A & B ISSUED BY 3RD RESPONDENT IN NO.MPR/MC/33/07-08 DATED 27.10.2007, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4711 WP No. 65261 of 2011 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M.G.UMA ORAL ORDER The petitioners have approached this Court seeking writ in the nature of Certiorari to quash the order dated 11.11.2010, passed by respondent No.1, produced as per Annexure-D and to set aside the P.T. sheet and hissa Form No.4, produced as per Annexures-A and B, effected by respondent No.3 as per order dated 27.10.2007. 2. Heard Sri.Vinuta M Khannur, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri.Abhinandan Hiremath, learned counsel representing Sri.G.I.Gachchinmath for respondent No.4, Sri.T.Hanumareddy, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 3. Perused the materials on record. 3. It is the contention of the petitioners that the land bearing Sy.No.64/1, totally measuring 10.05 acres situated at Borgaon village, Chikkodi taluk is an ancestral joint family property. One of the brothers sold 2 acres 21 guntas 4 annas of land in favour of respondent No.4 under the sale deed dated 26.09.2005. On the basis of the application filed - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4711 WP No. 65261 of 2011 by respondent No.4, phodi was effected in Sy.No.64/1, measuring 7 acres 23 guntas 12 annas i.e. Sy.No.64/1A, measuring 2 acres 21 gutnas 4 annas. This phodi was questioned by the petitioners before respondent No.2 by preferring appeal under Section 49(1) of Karnataka Land Revenue Act (for short the Act). The said appeal was allowed and the phodi was set aside. Respondent No.4 challenged the same before the Deputy Commissioner by preferring an appeal under Section 50 of Act. The said appeal came to be allowed by the Deputy Commissioner, by passing the impugned order as per Annexure-D and restored the phodi as per Annexure-B. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioners have filed the present petition. 4. Per contra, it is the contention of contesting respondent No. 4 that even though the property was a joint family property, all the members have consented for selling 2 acres 21 guntas 4 annas of land in favour of respondent No. 4. The registered sale deed dated 26.09.2005 was never challenged by any of the family members. It is also his contention that the petitioners have filed the suit in OS - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4711 WP No. 65261 of 2011 No.396/2009 before the learned II Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Chikkodi for issuance of mandatory injunction. However, the said suit was settled between the petitioners and the defendants, and the suit was decreed as per the mediation report dated 20.06.2013. Accordingly, the final decree was drawn. Under such circumstances, the petition does not survive for consideration. 5. Learned Additional Government Advocate representing respondent Nos.1 to 3 submits that, filing of the suit by the petitioners in O.S.No.396/2009 in the year 2009 and subsequent decree of the suit on 20.06.2013, directing to draw the final decree was deliberately suppressed before this Court. It is a frivolous litigation by the petitioners. Hence, he prays for passing of appropriate orders. 6. On perusal of the materials on record, admittedly there is a sale deed dated 26.09.2005 executed by one of the member of the joint family in favour of respondent No.4 in respect of 2 acres 21 guntas 4 annas of land in Sy.No.64/1 which is mutated as 64/1 A. The said phodi was - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4711 WP No. 65261 of 2011 questioned by the petitioners by preferring an appeal before the respondent No.2 which came to be allowed. However, respondent No.4 challenged the said order by preferring an appeal under Section 50 of the Act, and the appeal was allowed by passing the impugned order as per Annexure-D. The Deputy Commissioner has given elaborate reasons for allowing the appeal and to restore the phodi entry. He has also referred to the civil suit filed by the petitioners herein, who were the respondents before the learned Civil Judge, Chikkodi. In spite of that, while filing the petition, there is no reference to the suit in O.S.No.396 of 2009 filed by the petitioners. Even thereafter, when the suit was decreed in terms of the mediation report, and the Court directed to draw the final decree, the same was not reported to the Court. On the other hand, the petition which was filed during August 2011 was pending till date without any reasons. Therefore, it is clear that the petitioners have deliberately suppressed the material facts before this Court to maintain this petition without any merits. Hence, the - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4711 WP No. 65261 of 2011 petition is liable to be dismissed with exemplary cost. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i) The petition is dismissed. ii) Petitioners are liable to pay cost of Rs.10,000/- to be recovered as arrears of land revenue by the respondent No.1. iii) Office to communicate this order to respondent No.1 for information and for needful action. Sd/- (M.G.UMA) JUDGE VB CT:ANB List No.: 2 Sl No.: 4