- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27172 WP NO.16275 OF 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 08TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.16275 OF 2026 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: A. RAMESH S/O LATE ANNAYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS R/AT KAIKONDARAHALLI VILLAGE, VARTHUR HOBLI, BENGALURU SOUTH, NOW BENGALURU EAST TALUK, BENGALURU - 560 036. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRAKASH M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE SPL. DISTRICT COMMISSIONER BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT, BENGALURU - 560 009. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BENGALURU NORTH SUB-DIVISION, BENGALURU - 560 009. 3. THE TAHSILDAR BENGALURU EAST TALUK, K.R. PURAM, BENGALURU - 560 036. 4. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR BENGALURU EAST TALUK, K.R. PURAM, BENGALURU - 560 036. Digitally signed by CHAYA S A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27172 WP NO.16275 OF 2026 5. THE REVENUE INSPECTOR PANATHUR CIRCLE, VARTHUR HOBLI, BENGALURU EAST TALUK BENGALURU - 560 087. 6. M. MUNISWAMY S/O LATE MUNIVENKATAPPA, AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS, R/AT BUKKASAGARAM VILLAGE, HOSUR TALUK, KRISHNAGIRI DISTRICT, TAMIL NADU - 635 109. 7. PADMAVATHI KRISHNA INFRA-LLP (REGD. UNDER LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP ACT) NO.208, WEST MINISTERS COMPLEX, NO.13, CUNNINGHAM ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 052. REP. BY PADMAVATHI KRISHNA. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. B.P. RADHA, AGA FOR R1 TO R5; SRI. S. VEMA REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R7) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH/SET-ASIDE THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 03RD MARCH, 2025 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 IN CASE NO.RA(BE) 114/2025 VIDE ANNEXURE-F TO CHANGE KHATHA AND THE MUTATION ORDER DATED 11TH MARCH, 2025 IN M.R.NO.T-10/ 2024-25 VIDE ANNEXURE-G AND CHANGE OF RTC ENTRY THEREON IN FAVOUR OF THE RESPONDENT NO.6; QUASH THE ORDER DATED 22ND APRIL, 2025 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.4 IN CASE NO.RRT(DIS)88/2025 VIDE ANNEXURE-J TO CHANGE THE KHATHA AND M.R.NO.T-12/2024-25 DATED 05TH MAY, 2025 VIDE ANNEXURE-K AND CHANGE OF RTC OF 2025- 26 ENTRY THEREON IN FAVOUR OF RESPONDENT NO.7 AND CONSEQUENTLY THE ORDER DATED 10TH APRIL, 2026 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1, DISMISSING THE CASE NO.RP/290/2025 VIDE ANNEXURE-M AND FURTHER RESTORE - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27172 WP NO.16275 OF 2026 THE REVENUE ENTRIES AS STOOD EARLIER IN THE NAME OF PETITIONER, HIS BROTHERS AS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES OF THEIR DECEASED FATHER ANNAYAPPA AND UNCLES YELLAPPA AND MUNIYAPPA WITH RESPECT TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY BEARING SYURVEY NO.9 MEASURING 3 ACRES 21 GUNTAS OF KAIKONDARAHALLI VILLAGE, VARTHUR HOBLI, BENGALURU EAST TALUK IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH ORAL ORDER Smt. B.P. Radha, learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for respondents 1 to 5. 2. In this writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 03rd March, 2025 (Annexure-F) passed by the respondent No.2 in Case No. RA(BE)114/2025; order dated 22nd April, 2025 (Annexure-J) passed by the respondent No.4 in Case No.RRT(Dis)88/2025; and order dated 10th April, 2026 (Annexure-M) passed by the respondent No.1 in Case No.RP/290/2025. 3. Heard Sri. Prakash M., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner; Smt. B.P. Radha, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1 to 5; and - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27172 WP NO.16275 OF 2026 Sri. S. Vema Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.7. 4. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on perusal of the impugned orders passed by the respondents-Authorities, the same would indicate that the mutation of the subject land has been effected on the basis of registered Sale Deeds dated 06th August, 1999 and 13th March, 2025. On perusal of the impugned order dated 10th April, 2026 (Annexure-M) passed by the respondent No.1 in Case No.RP/290/2025, it is forthcoming that Regular First Appeal No.498/2018 is pending consideration before this Court in respect of the subject land. Therefore, until the rights of the parties are crystalised in the aforementioned appeal, I do not find any perversity in the impugned orders passed by the respondent-Authorities. Accordingly, writ petition is dismissed. SD/- (E.S. INDIRESH) JUDGE ARK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 35