- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26671 WP No. 17127 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO.17127 OF 2025 (LB-BMP) BETWEEN: 1. SMT.J.M.SANDHYA W/O VIJAY D/O JAYATEERTHA RAO M R AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS NO.39, 3RD MAIN, 4TH CROSS KENGERI SATELLITE TOWN BENGALURU 560 060 2. SMT.J.M.SUCHITRA W/O RAMKUMAR AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS NO.14, WHEATFIELD ROAD STANWAY, COLCHESTER CO3 OYJ UNITED KINGDOM BOTH PETITIONERS ARE REPRESENTED BY THEIR GENERAL POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER DR.JAYATEERTHA RAO R M S/O LATE RAMACHANDRA RAO S M AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS SRI.LAKSHMINARASIMHA NILAYA 3RD MAIN, 4TH CROSS KENGERI SATELLITE TOWN BENGALURU - 560060 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI.H V NAGARAJA RAO, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by NAGARAJA B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26671 WP No. 17127 of 2025 AND: 1. THE COMMISSIONER BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE N R SQUARE BENGALURU - 560002 2. THE ASSISTANT REVENUE OFFICER J P NAGAR SUB-DIVISION BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE 30TH MAIN, 12TH CROSS 1ST STAGE, J P NAGAR BEGALURU - 560078 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.K.S.MALLIKARJUNA REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R.1 AND R.2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ANNEXURE -H VIDE ORDER NO.VAAGU 179 JPINA/PR/1137/2024-25 DATED 05.02.2025 PASSED BY THE R2 REFUSING TO TRANSFER/ MUTATE KHATA WITHOUT AN ORDER BY THE COMPETENT CIVIL COURT AND ALLOW THE WP BY DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO CHANGE/MUTATE KHATA OF THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY IN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER AND GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEFS AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER The captioned writ petition is filed by the Legatee assailing the endorsement dated 05.02.2025 issued by - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26671 WP No. 17127 of 2025 respondent No.2 evidenced at Annexure-H declining to act on the petitioners' claim based on the Will requesting for change of katha. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2 – BBMP. Perused the records. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners, while reiterating the grounds urged in the writ petition, made a fervent submission that the petitioners are entitled to seek mutation of katha based on the Will dated 19.07.2018 said to have been executed by the deceased Smt.N.Indumathi. It is contended that the Revenue Authorities were not justified in rejecting the request for mutation, particularly when the petitioners have relied upon a registered Will. In support of this submission, the learned counsel placed reliance on a judgment rendered by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, which, according to the petitioners, supports - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26671 WP No. 17127 of 2025 their claim for mutation based on testamentary disposition. 4. However, this Court, having regard to the factual matrix of the present case, is unable to accept the submission made by the petitioners’ counsel. It is pertinent to note that prior to the issuance of the endorsement dated 05.02.2025, there was an objection raised with respect to the validity of the Will, which was duly brought to the notice of the Revenue Authorities through a written communication. In such a circumstance, where the Will is under challenge or there exists a cloud of suspicion regarding its validity, the legal position laid down by the Co-ordinate Bench in the case of Sri.A.M. Basavarajappa v. State of Karnataka and Others in W.P.No.8023/2022 c/w W.P.Nos.17555/2016 and 3123/2017 cannot be pressed into service by the petitioners. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26671 WP No. 17127 of 2025 5. It is by now well settled that the jurisdiction of the Revenue Authorities in matters concerning mutation is confined to updating revenue records and does not extend to adjudicating disputed questions of title. In this regard, it is apposite to refer to the authoritative pronouncement of the Full Bench of this Court in NAGENDRA SINGH V. SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU1, wherein it has been categorically held that whenever a claim to mutation is based on a Will and the same is contested or objected to, the Revenue Authorities lack the jurisdiction to go into the genuineness or validity of the Will. In such cases, the party asserting rights based on the Will must necessarily approach the competent Civil Court for appropriate relief by instituting a suit for declaration and consequential reliefs. 6. In the instant case, the endorsement dated 05.02.2025 issued by Respondent No.2 is in strict conformity with the legal position enunciated by the Full 1 ILR 2002 KAR 2750 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26671 WP No. 17127 of 2025 Bench in the aforementioned judgment. The Revenue Authority has rightly relegated the petitioners to establish their right and title before the competent Civil Court. Therefore, this Court finds no infirmity or illegality in the issuance of the said endorsement, and as such, no ground is made out for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Consequently, the writ petition stands dismissed. However, it is made clear that the dismissal of this writ petition shall not preclude the petitioners from approaching the competent Civil Court to establish the validity and enforceability of the Will dated 19.07.2018, and to seek appropriate reliefs in accordance with law. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE NBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17