- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27281 WP No. 41750 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL WRIT PETITION NO. 41750 OF 2017 (KVOA) BETWEEN: 1. K.S. LOKANATHA REDDY S/O K. SIDDA REDDY RESIDING AT NO.A1-806 ELITA PROMENADE, VII PHASE, J.P. NAGAR BENGALURU - 550 078. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. P.N. RAJESHWARA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MARAPPA S/O ERANNA RESIDNG AT KODLIPURA VILLAGE, ATTIBELE HOBI, ANEKAL TALUK BENGLAURU DISTRICT - 562 106. 2. THE TAHSILDAR ANEKAL TALUK, ANEKAL BENGALURU DISTRICT - 562 106. 3. A. V.R. RAMAKRISHNAIAH S/O LATE SAMPANGIRAMAIAH SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES SMT. NAGAMMA W/O LATE RAMAKRISHNAIAH AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS, Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27281 WP No. 41750 of 2017 B. RAMAMURTHY S/O LATE RAMAKRISHNAIAH AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS C. C.R. ANANTHU S/O. LATE RAMAKRISHNAIAH AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS D. SAMPANGAI S/O. RAMAKRISHNAIAH AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS E. R. SRINIVAS S/O. LATE RAMAKRISHNAIAH AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS F. SMT. R. SHANTHA D/O. LATE RAMAKRISHNAIAH AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS G. SMT. R. PADMAVATHI D/O. LATE RAMAKRISHNAIAH AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS 3A TO 3G ARE RESIDING AT NO.117, 5TH MAIN, 7TH CROSS CAUVERY NAGAR PADMANABHA NAGAR BENGALURU - 560 017 H. SMT. R. RADHA D/O. LATE RAMAKRISHNAIAH AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.19, 5TH MAIN SARASWATHIPURAM MYSURU - 570 009 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27281 WP No. 41750 of 2017 4. V.S. SOMASUNDAR S/O. V. SAMPANGIRAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS R/AT NO.781, NEAR JALAGERAMMA TEMPLE STREET BENGALURU - 560 050 5. V.S. SURYANARAYANA S/O. LATE SAMPANGIRAMAIAH SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES A. SHIVAKUMAR S/O. LATE V.S. SURYANARAYANA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS B. RAMAKUMAR S/O LATE V.S. SURYANARAYANA AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.31/B, NEAR GOVERNMENT HOSPITAL TANK STREET ROAD, HOSUR KRISHNAGIRI DISTRICT TAMILNADU - 635 001. 6. STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE MULTISTORIED BUILDING DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU - 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. LALITHA P.M., HCGP FOR R2 AND R6 SRI. M.S. VARADARAJAN, ADVOCATE FOR R1 VIDE ORDER DATED 14.0.2025, NOTICE TO R3 (A TO H) AND R5 (A AND B) ARE D/W) - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27281 WP No. 41750 of 2017 THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE ENTIRE RECORDS ON THE FILE OF R-2 AND THE ENTIRE RECORDS IN M.A.NO.5019 OF 2014 ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE III ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, AT ANEKAL AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL ORAL ORDER In this petition, petitioner who claimed to have purchased the property bearing Sy.No.81, measuring 3 acres 15 guntas and Sy.No.57, measuring 35 guntas, both situated at Kodlipura Village, Attibele Hobli, Anekal Taluk, Bengaluru District, from the legal representatives of respondent Nos.3, 4 and 5, in terms of Sale Deeds dated 26.03.2007, 30.03.2007 and 12.04.2006, is before this Court being aggrieved by the order dated 04.09.2017, passed in M.A.No.5019/2014, on the file of III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, at Anekal, by which, while allowing the appeal filed by respondent No.1 herein had directed mutation of name of respondent No.1 herein in respect of the very same land - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27281 WP No. 41750 of 2017 based on the deed of sale dated 06.06.1968. Respondent No.1 in turn had claimed that his father had purchased the very same property from original grantees on 06.06.1968. 2. Parties have now, filed a compromise petition dated 08.04.2026, which reads as under: "The Petitioner and Respondent No.1 submits as follows: 1. The Petitioner has filed the above writ petition challenging the Order dated 04.09.2017 in M.A. No.5019/2014 at Annexure-A, whereunder the appeal filed by Respondent No.1 has been allowed the Order dated 15.12.2009 passed in VOA:CR:46/2008-09 by the 2nd Respondent Tahsildar, is set aside at Annexure-Κ. 2. The Petitioner and Respondent No.1 have amicably resolved their dispute and request this Hon'ble Court to dispose of the present writ petitions in terms of the compromise petition as follows: 3. Properties more fully described in Schedule-A hereunder and hereafterwards referred Compromise-A schedule properties is allotted to the Petitioner i.e., Sri.K.S.Lokanatha Reddy. 4. Properties more fully described in Schedule-B hereunder and hereafterwards referred Compromise-B schedule properties is allotted to the Respondent No.1 i.e., Sri. Marappa. 5. The Respondent No.1, do hereby acknowledge the absolute right of the Petitioner for an extent of 1 acre 05 guntas of residentially converted property in Sy No 81/2 and 15 guntas in Sy.No.81/1 of Kodlipura Village, Attibele Hobli, Anekal Taluk, morefully described in the schedule-A hereunder and hereinafter referred to as the Schedule-A properties. 6. Similarly, the Petitioner do hereby acknowledge the absolute right of the Respondent No.1 for an extent of remaining 1 acre 35 guntas in Sy.No.81/1 and 35 guntas of land in Sy No 57/1 and 57/2 of Kodlipura Village, Attibele Hobli, Anekal Taluk, morefully described in the schedule-B hereunder and hereinafter referred to as the Schedule-B properties. 7. For the purpose of clarity, a sketch is also attached to this compromise petition which shall be read as part and parcel of this compromise petition, showing the lands falling to the share of Petitioner and Respondent No. 1. 8. The father of the respondent No.1 namely Sri Eranna had purchased both Sy.No 81 and 57 from the Respondent No. 3 to 5. Similarly the Petitioner has purchased the lands in question from Respondent No.3 to 5.As the lands are already sold by the Respondent No.3 to 5, therefore they have no right over the lands in question and as such Respondent No.3 to 5 are not made parties to this compromise Petition. 9. In view of this settlement, the Tahsildar, Respondent No.2 shall make out all the revenue records in the respective names of the Petitioner in so far as 'A' schedule properties are concerned and Respondent No.1 in so far as 'B' schedule properties are concerned, treating the sketch attached to this joint memo as 11E sketch. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27281 WP No. 41750 of 2017 10. The sale deed dated 06-06-1968 the Father of the First Respondent is hereby agreed to be confined to the property described in schedule B of this compromise petition and shall stand rectified accordingly. 11. The Sale deeds dated 26-03-2007, 30-03-2007 and 12-04-2007 of the petitioner is hereby agreed to be confined to the property described in schedule A of this compromise petition and shall stand rectified accordingly. 12. Each party to this compromise petition shall have the right and liberty to approach the Revenue Authorities/Municipal Authorities to have the katha transferred to their names with respect to the properties allotted to their respective shares in terms of this compromise petition. 13. Parties to this compromise petition do hereby agree and undertake that they will not raise any objections, protests etc., on the matter of transfer of katha to the name of each party with respect to properties allotted to their respective shares. 14. The Petitioner and the Respondent No.1 agree that they are at liberty to alienate/mortgage/Gift/GPA, etc., the Schedule-A and Schedule B properties to whomsoever they want, in future, if they desire so. 15.Each of the parties mutually assure each other that they shall not indulge or obstruct the enjoyment of their respective schedule properties in any manner whatsoever. The parties shall bear their respective cost. 16.Each party to this compromise petition does hereby assure the other parties that on and from today they are the absolute owners in possession and enjoyment of the properties allotted to their shares respectively under the terms of this compromise petition and they can enjoy the same absolutely and for ever without any let, hindrance or objection from the other parties in accordance with the true intents and purports of this compromise petition. 17.Parties to this compromise do hereby state and declare that they have entered into this compromise having regard to what is stated in the beginning and there is no element of fraud, mistake, mis-representation, duress or undue influence in them in filing this compromise petition. 18.The parties pray that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to take this compromise between the parties seeking consideration at the time of disposing of the above writ petitions, in the interest of justice and equity." 3. Parties are present, duly represented and identified by their counsel. A perusal of the terms of the compromise petition did not indicate the same being contrary to any provisions of law. 4. Parties have understood the terms of the compromise. Accordingly, compromise petition is taken on record. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27281 WP No. 41750 of 2017 5. Writ Petition is disposed of in terms of the compromise. Parties shall pay necessary and applicable stamp duty. Sd/- (M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE PSJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3