- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14807-DB WA No. 859 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF WRIT APPEAL NO. 859 OF 2024 (LR) BETWEEN: SMT. PAPAMMA, SINCE DECEASED BY HER LR, SRI. PRAKASH BABU, S/O. LATE MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, R/AT NO. 55, 1ST CROSS, TAVAREKERE, BENGALURU - 560 081. …APPELLANT (BY MS. BINDU.U, ADVOCATE FOR SMT. PRAMILA NESARGI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. S.M. KRISHNAPPA, S/O. LATE MUNISWAMAPPA, R/AT SALUNUNASE VILLAGE, KAGGALIPURA DHAKLE, UTTARAHALLI HOBLI, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK. 2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR. B. R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001. Digitally signed by REKHA R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14807-DB WA No. 859 of 2024 3. THE LAND TRIBUNAL, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK, BENGALURU - 571 511. 4. SRI. B. K. GOVINDARAJU SINCE DEAD BY HIS LR SMT. BHARATHI, D/O. B. K. GOVINDARAJU, MAJOR IN AGE, R/AT NO. 13, WATSON ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. THILAK RAJ S.V. ADVOCATE FOR SRI. H.N. BASAVARAJU, ADVOCATE FOR R1, SRI. MOHAMMED JAFFAR SHAH, AGA FOR R2 AND R3) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED:15.03.2024 IN RP No.350/2017 IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. 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 T.M.NADAF - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14807-DB WA No. 859 of 2024 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF) This writ appeal under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961 is by the respondent in Review Petition No.350/2017 passed by the learned Single Judge dated 15.03.2024. 2. The learned Single Judge upon consideration of rival submissions, allowed the review petition. Consequently, recalled the order passed in the writ petition and restored the writ petition to its original file. 3. Heard Smt.Pramila Nesargi, learned Senior counsel appearing for the appellant; Sri.H.N.Basavaraju, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1 and learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.2 and 3. 4. The learned Senior counsel submits that while allowing the review petition, the learned Single Judge ought not to have recalled the order passed in the writ - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14807-DB WA No. 859 of 2024 petition and restored the matter to its original file, which is illegal and not within the scope of the provisions of Order XLVII of CPC. Whereas, learned counsel for respondent No.1 as well as learned Additional Government Advocate supports the order passed by the learned Single judge in the Review Petition. 5. Having considered the rival submissions, the learned Single Judge upon consideration found that sufficient cause has been made out on two grounds raised in paragraph No.3 of the review order and accordingly allowed the review petition and recalled the order in writ petition as the same warrants re-hearing of the Writ Petition and restored the same to the original file. 6. No prejudice would be caused to the applicant if the Writ Petition is heard again, wherein opportunity will be granted to the appellant and respondents. Since the writ petition would be heard on its merits again all contentions of the parties are left open. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14807-DB WA No. 859 of 2024 7. We do not find any error in the discretion of the exercised by the learned Single Judge, in passing the impugned order. Accordingly, the writ appeal sans merits and is dismissed. In view of dismissal of the Writ Appeal, pending I.A's if any, shall stand disposed of. Sd/- (D K SINGH) JUDGE Sd/- (T.M.NADAF) JUDGE PK List No.: 2 Sl No.: 3 ct-vn