- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46903 WP NO.18211 OF 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.18211 OF 2021 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: SRI. VABEGOWDA S/O NANJEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 85 YEARS, R/AT WARD NO.23, RENUKAMBA ROAD, CHANNARAYAPATANA TOWN, HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 116. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MANJUNATH K.V., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, M.S. BUILDING, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER EXCISE DEPARTMENT, CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT, CHIKKAMAGALURU - 577 101. 3. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HASSAN DISTRICT, HASSAN - 573 116. 4. TAHSILDAR CHANNARAYAPATANA TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 116. Digitally signed by ARUNKUMAR M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46903 WP NO.18211 OF 2021 5. C.G. RAJAPPA S/O LATE GANTEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, R/AT SHILPA NIVASA, NAGASAMUDRA ROAD, IN FRONT OF BACKWARD COMMUNITY HOSTEL, CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 116. 6. SRI. GOVINDARAJU S/O GOVINDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/AT NO.1599/25, SARASWATHI LAYOUT, DAVANAGERE - 577 002. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MAHANTESH SHETTAR, AGA FOR R1 TO R4; SRI. K.N. NITISH, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. K.V. NARASIMHAN, ADVOCATE FOR R5; SRI. RAKESH B. BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR R6) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE AUCTION DATED 07TH OCTOBER, 2021 ISSUED VIDE PUBLIC NOTICE IN KANNADA PRABHA DAILY NEWS PAPER DATED 27TH SEPTEMBER, 2021 VIDE ANNEXURE-H; DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS 3 AND 4 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATIONS OF THE PETITIONER DATED 01ST OCTOBER, 2021 VIDE ANNEXURES 'F' AND 'G' AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION AS PER LAW; AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH ORAL ORDER In this writ petition, the petitioner has sought for quashing the Auction proceedings dated 07th October, 2021 as published in the Kannada Prabha daily newspaper on 27th September, 2021 (Annexure-H); inter alia sought for direction - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46903 WP NO.18211 OF 2021 to the respondents 3 and 4 to consider the representations of the petitioner dated 01st October, 2021 (Annexures 'F' and 'G') and take appropriate action as per law. 2. Heard Sri. Manjunath K.V., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner; Sri. Mahantesh Shettar, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1 to 4; Sri. K.N. Nitish, learned counsel on behalf of Sri. K.V. Narasimhan, appearing for the respondent No.5; and Sri. Rakesh B. Bhat, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.6. 3. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on perusal of averments made in the writ petition, the same would indicate that the petitioner is challenging the Public Auction proceeding conducted by the respondent- Authorities in respect of the schedule property claiming that the same is a self acquired property. In this regard, on perusal of the Notice dated 18th June, 2021 (Annexure-E) issued by the respondent No.4, the same would indicate that the respondent- Authorities have caused notice to the petitioner claiming Rs.1,62,72,116/- as the arrears of land revenue to the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46903 WP NO.18211 OF 2021 Government. It is to be noted that the respondent No.5 is claiming the schedule property as joint family property despite the fact that the petitioner is claiming the same as self acquired property. In that view of the matter, the dispute between the parties has to be resolved by determining the rights of the petitioner and the respondent No.5 over the schedule property in an independent proceedings. Therefore, I am of the considered opinion that, no interference be called for in this writ petition to direct the respondent-Authorities to consider the representations made by the petitioner at this stage. 4. It is also to be noted that, this Court, by order dated 05th October, 2021, passed an interim order and permitted the respondent-Authorities to proceed with the scheduled auction proceedings, however, restrained the respondent-Authorities from issuing Sale Certificate or Sale Confirmation order without permission of this Court. In this regard, it is forthcoming from the submission made by learned counsel Sri. Rakesh B. Bhat, appearing for the respondent No.6 that the respondent No.6 had participated in the Auction proceedings and purchased the schedule property. Therefore, as the disputed question of facts are involved, no interference - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46903 WP NO.18211 OF 2021 be called for in this writ petition. Accordingly, reserving liberty to the petitioner and the respondent No.5 to adjudicate their rights in a manner known to law, writ petition is disposed of. In view of the disposal of the writ petition, pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. SD/- (E.S. INDIRESH) JUDGE ARK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6