Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 83298 (KAR)

SRI. D. GIRIDHAR, v. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,

WP/10915/2025 · 2025-08-29

R Devdas

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33538 WP No. 10915 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 10915 OF 2025 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: SRI. D. GIRIDHAR, S/O LATE D.B.RAGHUNATH RAO, AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS, NO.2920, GOKULAM MAIN ROAD, V.V.PURAM, MYSURU -570002 …PETITIONER (BY SRI R.S. RAVI SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. AKARSH KUMAR GOWDA) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, MYSURU, MYSURU-570001 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, MYSURU, MYSURU-570001. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, MYSURU TALUK, MYSURU 570 001 4. BHAGYA SHANKAR, W/O V.S.JAI SHANKAR SWAMY, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, D.NO.404, 3RD MAIN, 4TH STAGE, T.K.RXTENSION, MYSURU CITY 570009. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MOHAMMED JAFFER SHAH AGA FOR R1 TO R3) Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33538 WP No. 10915 of 2025 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R- 1 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONER DTD. 19.06.2023 VIDE ANNX-D. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS ORAL ORDER The learned Additional Government Advocate takes notice for the respondents No.1 to 3. 2. Notice to respondent No.4 is not necessary for the following reasons: 3. The petitioner is before this Court seeking a writ of mandamus directing the Deputy Commissioner, Mysuru District to consider the representation dated 19.06.2023 at Annexure-D given by the petitioner. 4. Sri R S Ravi, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner purchased 04.4 guntas of land under a registered sale deed dated 9th February, 1994 at Annexure-A. However, the 4th respondent from whom the petitioner purchased the property sought to interfere with the peaceful possession of the petition schedule property, and - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33538 WP No. 10915 of 2025 therefore, the petitioner filed OS No.1313/2006 before the learned IV Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Mysore for declaration and permanent injunction, and there is a judgment and decree passed in favour of the petitioner. However, the grievance of the petitioner is that the name of the petitioner is not entered in the revenue records. 5. The learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents No.1 to 3 pointed out the description of the property in the registered sale deed dated 9th February, 1994, and submits that the petitioner has purchased a residential site measuring 60'x80', and admittedly, the land was converted. Therefore, he submitted that the petitioner cannot seek revenue entries to be maintained now in the revenue records when the land is situated within the jurisdiction of the Mysuru City Corporation. 6. Having regard to the facts stated herein above, this Court is of the considered opinion that it is the Tahsildar, Mysuru Taluk to whom a request was to be made and not the Deputy Commissioner. Moreover if the lands are within the jurisdiction of Mysuru City Corporation, then the question of - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33538 WP No. 10915 of 2025 maintaining the revenue records now in the name of the petitioner would not arise. Nevertheless, the writ petition stands disposed of reserving liberty to the petitioner to approach the 3rd respondent - Tahsildar, Mysuru Taluk with a request to enter the name of the petitioner in the revenue records. However, the Tahsildar shall verify as to whether the property in question is an agricultural land or a converted residential site, and whether it is situated within the jurisdiction of the Mysuru City Corporation. If it is found that the land in question is not an agricultural land, and situated within the jurisdiction of the Mysuru City Corporation, then appropriate endorsement shall be issued to the petitioner. However, if it is found that the land in question is an agricultural land, and the petitioner is entitled to have his name entered in the revenue records, and appropriate order shall be passed by the Tahsildar. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE Bkm List No.: 1 Sl No.: 30