- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43657-DB WA No. 1445 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA WRIT APPEAL NO. 1445 OF 2025 (KLR-RR/SUR) BETWEEN: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT KANDAYA BHAVAN, BENGALURU - 560 009. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BENGALURU NORTH SUB-DIVISION KANDAYA BHAVAN, BENGALURU - 560 009. 4. THE TAHSILDAR BENGALURU EAST K.R. PURAM BENGALURU - 560 036. 5. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR BENGALURU EAST K.R. PURAM, BENGALURU - 560 036. 6. THE REVENUE INSPECTOR WHITEFIELD K.R. PURAM HOBLI BENGALURU - 560 036. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI K.S. HARISH, GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by PRABHAKAR SWETHA KRISHNAN Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43657-DB WA No. 1445 of 2025 AND: 1. SMT. PRAMILAMMA W/O LATE KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS 2. SRI RAGHAVENDRA S/O LATE KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS 3. SRI RAJIV KRISHNA S/O LATE KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS 4. SRI RAMANJANEYA S/O LATE KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS 5. SRI MAHENDRA KUMAR S/O LATE B. MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS ALL ARE RESIDING AT NO.109/2 PATTANDUR AGRAHARA VILLAGE K.R. PURAM HOBLI BENGALURU - 560 066. …RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS WRIT APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 21.08.2024 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WRIT PETITION No.15794/2024 (KLR-RR/SUR) & ETC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43657-DB WA No. 1445 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE) 1. The appellants have filed the present appeal impugning an order dated 21.08.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.15794/2024 (KLR-RR/SUR). 2. The respondents have filed the said writ petition praying that the appellants be directed to consider the representations dated 14.08.2023, 21.09.2023 and 30.01.2024 and mutate their names in the revenue records in relation to the land falling in Survey No.109/2 situated at Pattandur Agrahara Village, K.R.Puram Hobli, Bengaluru East Taluk, Bengaluru [subject land]. 3. The respondents had filed the said representations seeking mutation and entry of their names in relation to the subject land. The respondents had claimed that they were in adverse possession of the land. The respondents had filed a suit for declaration of title to the subject land measuring 3 acres and 6 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43657-DB WA No. 1445 of 2025 guntas, being suit O.S.No.2518/2007. The said suit was dismissed by a judgment and decree dated 11.03.2011. However, the respondents have successfully assailed the same in an appeal bearing R.A.No.127/2011. In terms of the order passed in the said appeal, the respondents(plaintiffs) in the suit were declared as absolute owners. The appellants were also injuncted from interfering with their peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property. 4. The appellants had filed an appeal against the said decision. However, the decision rendered by the appellate Court was confirmed by this Court in RSA No.894/2012 in terms of a judgment and decree dated 19.06.2023. The appellants had preferred a special leave petition before the Supreme Court, which we have been informed that it was also dismissed. 5. Notwithstanding that the respondents had secured a decree confirming title of the subject land in their favour, the concerned authorities had not mutated their names in the land records. It is in the aforesaid context that the respondents filed - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43657-DB WA No. 1445 of 2025 W.P.No.15794/2024, which was allowed in terms of the impugned order. 6. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the appellants fairly states that since the decree has been passed, the concerned authorities are bound to give effect to the same and the entries in the land records are required to be mutated in favour of the title holders (plaintiffs). He, however, submits that the appellants have filed a review petition before the Supreme Court seeking to assail the judgment dated 19.06.2023 passed by this Court in R.S.A.No.894/2012, where the judgment and decree rendered in R.A.No.127/2011 is confirmed. 7. It is trite law that the entries in the land records do not confer title. Thus, if the appellants fails in setting aside the decree confirming title in favour of the respondents, prima facie, the concerned authorities are required to make entries in the land records accordingly. However, at this stage there is no dispute that the decree has been passed confirming title of the subject land in favour of the respondents. The entries in the land records must therefore, necessarily reflect the same. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43657-DB WA No. 1445 of 2025 8. We also note that the present appeal has been filed after an inordinate delay of 338 days. 9. Without going into the question whether the said delay is required to be condoned, we consider it apposite to dispose of the appeal with liberty to the appellants to revive the present appeal if the appellants succeeds in setting aside the decree passed in R.A.No.127/2011 as well as RSA No.894/2022. 10. The appeal is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. 11. Pending applications stand disposed of. Sd/- (VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE KPS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21