- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20138 WP No. 10755 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 10755 OF 2026 (KLR-RR/SUR) BETWEEN: 1. SHIVAKUMAR. C S/O. CHIKKA MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS AREHALLI VILLAGE, THAMMANAYAKANAHALLI POST, KASABA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT BENGALURU - 562 123. 2. KAVERAMMA, D/O. CHIKKA MUNIYAPPA W/O. VENKATESH K AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, NO.208, 7TH CROSS, NEAR LAKSHMINARAYANA TEMPLE, NETAJI LAYOUT, MUNEKOLALA, BENGALURU - 560 037. 3. RADHA, D/O CHIKKA MUNIYAPPA, W/O MARIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/AT NO.138, KARNOOR, MATHIGIRI, HOSUR TALUK, KRISHNAGIRI DISTRICT - 635 110. Digitally signed by JUANITA THEJESWINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20138 WP No. 10755 of 2026 4. SUGUNA C, D/O. CHIKKA MUNIYAPPA W/O. JAYARAM, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/AT NO.16/38, NEAR BRILLIANT SCHOOL, LAKSHMINARAYANA, BENGALURU - 560 037. 5. KESHAVA, S/O. CHIKKA MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, AREHALLI VILLAGE, THAMMANAYAKANAHALLI POST, KASABA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT. 6. MOHAN, S/O. CHIKKA MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS AREHALLI VILLAGE, THAMMANAYAKANAHALLI POST, KASABA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT BENGALURU - 562 123. 7. RAVIKIRAN, S/O. CHIKKA MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS AREHALLI VILLAGE, THAMMANAYAKANAHALLI POST, KASABA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT BENGALURU - 562 123. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20138 WP No. 10755 of 2026 8. ROOPA, D/O. CHIKKA MUNIYAPPA, W/O. MUNIRAJU, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.1/92, THATTIGANAPALLI, MUTHALLI, HOSUR TALUK, KRISHNAGIRI DIST. TAMIL NADU - 635 109. 9. GOWTHAM, S/O. CHIKKA MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS AREHALLI VILLAGE, THAMMANAYAKANAHALLI POST, KASABA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT BENGALURU - 562 123. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SHIVARAJU M.K, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDINGS, BENGALURU - 560 001 REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY. 2. THE TAHSILDAR, ANEKAL TALUK, ANEKAL - 562 106. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. B.P. RADHA, AGA) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20138 WP No. 10755 of 2026 SECOND RESPONDENT TO EFFECT TRANSFER OF KATHA, MUTATION AND RTC PERTAINING TO THE SCHEDULE AT ANNX- A TO J OF THE REGISTERED COMPROMISED DECREE SCHEDULE PROPERTIES IN THE RESPECTIVE NAMES OF THE PETITIONERS BY CONSIDERING THE REGISTERED COMPROMISE DECREES AND REPRESENTATION DATED 23/02/2026 AS PER ANNX-K AND TO GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEF OR RELIEFS. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS ORAL ORDER Learned Additional Government Advocate takes notice of both the respondents. 2. The grievance of the petitioners is that respondent No.2-Tahsildar, Anekal Taluk, has not considered the representation given by the petitioners, to enter their names in the RTC pursuant to the final decree drawn by the learned II Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Anekal in O.S.No.862/2022. Learned counsel points out to Annexure-L, which is the latest RTC for the year 2025-26 reflecting the name of Sri.Chikkamuniyappa S/o. late Kenchappa to an extent of 1 acre 13 guntas in Survey No.21 of Thammanayakanahalli Village, Kasaba Hobli, Anekal Taluk. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20138 WP No. 10755 of 2026 3. Learned Additional Government Advocate submits on instructions that the land in question is a gomal land. This Court has to only express dismay on the submission made by the learned Additional Government Advocate. When the RTC reflects the name of the person, it cannot be contended by the Tahsildar that the land belongs to the government. If that is the claim made by the government then appropriate proceedings should have been initiated to remove the name of the persons from the RTC. That exercise not having been undertaken, it would be impermissible on the part of the Tahsildar to contend that the land belongs to the government. 4. This Court in W.P.No.4071/2026 disposed of on 13.02.2026, has considered the provisions of the Karnataka Sakala Act, 2011 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short), which mandates 60 days for the Tahsildar to change the khata in terms of the registered instruments, failure of which incurs costs in terms of the provisions of the Act. 5. Consequently, the writ petition stands disposed of by imposing costs of ₹500/- on respondent No.2-Tahsildar, - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20138 WP No. 10755 of 2026 Anekal Taluk, payable to the petitioners along with the order of change of katha. A specific direction is issued to respondent No.2-Tahsildar, Anekal Taluk, to proceed to enter the name of the persons in whose favour the final decree is drawn by the Civil Court in O.S.No.862/2022, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Ordered accordingly. Learned Additional Government Advocate is permitted to file memo of appearance within a period of four weeks from today. Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE rv List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11