- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27703 WP No. 18269 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO. 18269 OF 2022 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: SRI. D.N. EERAPPA GOWDA, S/O LATE NIRVANE GOWDA, AGED 66 YEARS, R/AT DINNEKERE VILLAGE, VASTHARE HOBLI, CHIKMAGALORE TALUK, CHIKMAGALORE DISTRICT - 577 101. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRAKASH M.H, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CHIKMAGALORE - 577 101. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER CHIKMAGALORE REVENUE SUB DIVISION, CHIKMAGALORE - 577 101. 4. THE TAHSILDAR CHIKMAGALORE TALUK, Digitally signed by SHARMA ANAND CHAYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27703 WP No. 18269 of 2022 CHIKMAGALORE DISTRICT - 577 101. 5. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS CHIKMAGALORE DISTRICT, CHIKMAGALORE - 577 101. 6. SMT. RAMA K.S, W/O SURYANARAYANA L.A, AGE MAJOR, R/AT DINNEKERE VILLAGE, VASTHARE HOBLI, CHIKMAGALORE TALUK, CHIKMAGALORE DISTRICT - 577 101. ALSO AT NO.380, IST A MAIN, IST STAGE, GIRINAGAR, BENGALURU - 85. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. D.R. RAVISHANKAR, SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI. AKSHAY S. VASIST, ADVOCATE AND SRI. SUDHARSHAN SURESH, ADVOCATE FOR R6; SRI. MANJUNATH K, HCGP FOR R1 TO R5) THIS WP FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DTD 26.07.2022 PASSED BY THE R2 IN R.P.NO.62/19-20 VIDE ANNEXURE-P BY DECLARING THE SAME AS ILLEGAL AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27703 WP No. 18269 of 2022 ORAL ORDER In this writ petition, the petitioner is assailing the order dated 26.07.2022 passed by the respondent no.2 in R.P.No.62/2019-20 vide Annexure-P. 2. Heard Sri Prakash M.H., learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Manjunath.K., learned HCGP for respondents no.1 to 5 and Sri D.R.Ravishankar, learned Senior Counsel for Sri Akshay.S Vasist and Sri.Sudarshan Suresh, learned counsel for respondent no.6. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that, the respondent no.2 has no occasion to set aside the order dated 21.03.2007 in R.A.No.421/2006-07 since the sale has been made pursuant to the affidavit filed by the parties, at Annexure-J dated 05.08.2006. He further submitted that, there is no dispute with regard to the title of either of the parties and only aspect which is to be considered is, that what has been purchased by respondent no.6 is incorrect and accordingly, same has been rightly refused by respondent no.3 by order dated 21.03.2007 (Annexure-K) which has been wrongly interfered with by respondent no.2 at Annexure-P and - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27703 WP No. 18269 of 2022 therefore, sought for interference by this Court. He further invited the attention of this Court to the order dated 27.09.2019 (Annexure-M) passed by the Deputy Director of Land Records and submitted that, the issue is only with regard to the encroachment, if any, by either of the parties and therefore, argued that, the finding recorded by respondent no.2 at Annexure-P requires to be set aside. 4. Sri D.R.Ravishankar, learned Senior Counsel appearing for respondent no.6 invited the attention of the Court to the operative portion of the order dated 26.07.2022 at Annexure-P and contended that, since there is discrepancy insofar as schedule to the properties are concerned as per the sale deeds, respondent no.2 has rightly directed the jurisdictional Tahsildar to conduct enquiry and survey, based on the sale deeds and, to take decision in the matter and therefore, sought to justify the impugned order at Annexure-P to the writ petition. 5. In the backdrop of these aspects, I have carefully examined the order passed by respondent no.3 at Annexure-K wherein the said order dated 21.03.2007 (Annexure-K) has been passed based on the affidavit filed by the parties at - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27703 WP No. 18269 of 2022 Annexure-J to the writ petition. It is forthcoming from the order passed by the Deputy Director of Land Records, Chikkamagaluru (Annexure-M), wherein it is stated that, there is no tally with regard to the possession of the parties as well as the documents in the Survey Department and therefore, the Hissa Phodi made in Sy.No.527/1,2 of Vastare Village, Chikkamagaluru Taluk, has been cancelled. Further, I have also noticed from Annexure-P, wherein respondent no.2, while exercising the revisional jurisdiction under Section 136(3) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, by looking into the entire documents, has recorded a finding of fact that, there are three sale deeds wherein 11 acres of land has been sold in favour of the petitioner as well as respondent no.6. 6. In that view of the matter, I am of the view that, as respondent no.2 has remanded the matter to respondent no.4 to conduct spot inspection and take decision in the matter with regard to the extent of land to which the parties are entitled to, based on the schedule mentioned in the sale deeds referred to above, I do not find any merit in the writ petition. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27703 WP No. 18269 of 2022 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. The Tahsildar-respondent no.4 is directed to expedite the direction issued by respondent no.2 and complete the same at the earliest. Sd/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE rs List No.: 1 Sl No.: 44 CT: BHK