- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28444 RP No. 276 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ REVIEW PETITION NO. 276 OF 2025 BETWEEN: SMT. L. C. SOBHARANI AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS W/O SRUESH G N LAKSHMISAGAR VILLAGE HADIKERE AMRUTAPURA HOBLI TARIKERE TALUK CHITRADURGA DISTRICT KARNATAKA 577 228 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. DHEERAJ S J.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OBAVVA CIRCLE CHITRADURGA 577 501 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMIKSSIONER INDIRANAGAR TARIKERE 577 228 3. SMT. BASAMMA AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS W/O LATE CHANDRAPPA RESIDING AT LAKSHMI SAGAR VILLAGE HADIKERE POST, AMRUTHPUR HOBLI TARIKERE TALUK CHITRADURGA DISTRICT KARNATAKA 577 228 Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28444 RP No. 276 of 2025 4. SMT L C ASHA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS W/O GNAGADARAPPA KACHAPURA VILLAGE SRIRAMPURA HOBLI HOSADURGA TALUK CHITRADURGA DISTRICT KARNATAKA 577527 5. SMT. L C INDRAMMA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS D/O LATE CHANDRAPPA KACHAPURA VILLAGE SRIRAMAURA HOBLI HOSADURGA TLAUK CHITRADURGA DISTRICT KARNATAKA 577 527 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MOHAMMED JAFFER SHAH., AGA FOR R1 & R2; SRI. H. SUNIL KUMAR., ADVOCATE FOR R3) THIS REVIEW PETITION FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 R/W SEC. 114 OF CPC, 1908, PRAYING TO REVIEW THE FINAL ORDER AND JUDGMENT DATED 12.09.2024 PASSED BY THIS HONBLE COURT IN WP NO. 10899/2024 VIDE ANNEXURE A. AND ETC. THIS REVIEW PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: a. Review the Final Order and Judgment dated 12.09.2024 passed by this Hon’ble Court in Writ Petition No.10899 of 2024 vide Annexure-A; b. Call for records in Writ Petition No.10899 of 2024; - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28444 RP No. 276 of 2025 c. Pass such other and further orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interests of justice. 2. A review of the order dated 12.09.2025 in Sri Kidiyoor Survarna Vittalaksha Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) & Anr., in WP No.10899 of 2024 passed by the Co- ordinate Branch is sought for on the ground that the petitioner had not been served with a notice. 3. The second submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner has made payment of all the monies and as such the order considering the representation of the respondents could not be considered. 4. Thirdly, his submission is that the Assistant Commissioner or the Deputy Commissioner did not have jurisdiction to set aside the sale deed. 5. WP No.10899 of 2024 came to be partly allowed by order dated 12.09.2024 directing respondent No.2 to consider the representation of the petitioner-therein in light of the order dated 03.11.2022 passed by the Deputy Commissioner allowing the application filed by a senior citizen directing payment of monthly - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28444 RP No. 276 of 2025 maintenance which was allegedly not paid by the petitioners-herein. 6. The said order directing consideration of representation arising as an execution to the order passed by Deputy Commissioner. The order passed by Deputy Commissioner, not having been challenged by the petitioner, a Review Petition cannot be maintained on the aforesaid grounds. 7. Those grounds could only be raised an appeal filed for challenging the order of Deputy Commissioner or in the Execution Petition to establish that the petitioners has complied with the petition with the orders passed by the Deputy Commissioner. 8. Reserving such liberty, the petition stands disposed of. SD/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE SR List No.: 2 Sl No.: 1