- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10351-DB WA No. 1188 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH WRIT APPEAL NO. 1188 OF 2025 (KLR-LG) BETWEEN: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRL. SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, UDUPI, RAJATADRI, MANIPAL - 576 104. UDUPI DIST. 3. THE TAHSILDAR KUNDAPURA TALUK KUNDAPURA - 576 201. UDUPI. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. MOHAMMAD JAFFAR SHAH, AGA) AND: 1. SMT. P. SHALINI SHETTY D/O LATE.. MONAPPA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 84 YEARS, 2. SRI. P. SURYANARAYANA SHETTY Digitally signed by SREEDHARAN BANGALORE SUSHMA LAKSHMI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10351-DB WA No. 1188 of 2025 S/O LATE. MONAPPA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS 3. SRI. RAKESH SHETTY S/O SMT. SHYAMALA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS ALL ARE RESIDING AT NO.28 HALADI – 576 222. KUNDAPURA TALUK UDUPI DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K CHANDRAKANTH ARIGA, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT APPEAL FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO ALLOW THE WRIT APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HON’BLE COURT IN WRIT PETITION No. 30826 OF 2024 (KLR-LG), DATED 11.02.2025 AND ETC., THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10351-DB WA No. 1188 of 2025 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH) 1. This writ appeal has been filed aggrieved by the impugned order dated 11.02.2025 passed in WP.No.30826/20245 by the learned Single Judge, wherein, the same has been allowed. Being aggrieved by the same the appellant No.1-State of Karnataka has preferred this appeal, on the ground that the learned Single Judge has committed an error in considering the law regarding permanent grant as stipulated under the South Kanara District (Grant of Lease) Rules, 1957 and Rule 33 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 2. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. 3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the purpose for which the land was granted is to raise the cashew for a period of 30 years under Rule 2 (read with Rule 5) of the South Kanara District Lease of Lands for Cultivation Rules, 1957. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10351-DB WA No. 1188 of 2025 4. It is further contended that the appellant was issued permanent ownership by imposing conditions that he shall not alienate the property for a period of 25 years which is appropriate and proper. However, the learned Single Judge has not gone through the said aspect and set aside the order passed by the respondent No.3/appellant No.3 which is contrary to the relevant rules and conditions of ownership. Therefore, the same has to be set aside. Making such submissions learned counsel for the appellants prays to allow the appeal. 5. Per Contra, the learned counsel for the respondents vehemently justified the order passed the learned Single Judge and prays to dismiss the appeal. 6. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the findings of the learned Single Judge in passing the Order in paragraph No.4, which reads as thus: 4. The respondent No.3-Tahasildar has issued a Saguvali Chit; however, it includes a condition restricting the petitioner from alienating the property for a period of 25 years. This matter has been effectively addressed by the co-ordinate bench in W.P. No. 37404/2013. The relevant portion, starting from paragraph No.16, is extracted below: - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10351-DB WA No. 1188 of 2025 "16. Rule 23 (1) of the Karnataka Land Grant Rules, 1969 as it stood prior to its amendment in 1978 which provides the lands granted temporarily prior to coming into force of the Land Grant Rules reads as follows: Rule 23. Confirmation of lands to persons to whom the lands have been leased temporarily Notwithstanding anything contained in these rules,- (1) Where, before the commencement of these rules agricultural lands were leased temporarily to any person for purposes of cultivation and the lease contemplated the subsequent grant of the land to the lessee and all the conditions of the lease have been complied with, such lands may be granted to the lessee by the Deputy Commissioner on payment of the price fixed by him in accordance with Rule 12." 17. As could be seen from the said Rule, a specific provision is made for confirmation of the land which were leased temporarily before coming into force and the said Rule clearly stipulates that if all the conditions of the lease have been complied with, the lands would be granted by the Deputy Commissioner on payment of the price fixed by him, in accordance with Rule 12. The said rule only provides for fixation of the price and does not provide the Deputy Commissioner to impose any further conditions. 18. It is also to be kept in mind that when a person is being conferred with permanent ownership as promised to him in the order of grant made 30 years ago, that promise cannot be diluted by imposing a condition that he shall not alienate the land for a further period of 25 years. This virtually, amounts to altering the terms of the grant 30 years after it was accepted by both parties, which is clearly impermissible. 19. I am therefore of the view that the imposition of the condition- prohibiting the lands to be alienated for a period of 25 years as per the Clause 4 of Annexure-C and Clause 7 of the Saguvali Chit Annexure-H are wholly illegal and they are accordingly quashed. 20. The writ petition is allowed." - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10351-DB WA No. 1188 of 2025 7. On careful reading of the paragraph stated supra, it makes clear that imposing the condition while granting the permanent ownership is contrary to Rule 23A of Karnataka Land Grant (Amendment) Rules, 2023. Therefore, We are of the considered opinion that there is no occasion for us to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge. 8. Hence, We proceed to pass the following: ORDER i. This Writ Appeal is dismissed Sd/- (D K SINGH) JUDGE Sd/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE NM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5