- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32074 WP No. 35713 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO. 35713 OF 2019 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: SHRI. SRINIVASA NAIDU AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS S/O LATE PAPAIAH NAIDU R/AT A MOTHAKAHALLI VILLAGE KADIRIPURA POST KYASAMBALLI HOBLI, KGF TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT-563114 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. C R SUBRAMANYA., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KOLAR DISTRICT, KOLAR-563114 2. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDHAR BANGARPET TALUK BANGARPET KOLAR DISTRICT-563114. 3. GAMTALAPPA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS S/O LATE CHINNABIDAPPA GOWDA R/AT A MOTHAKAHALLI VILLAGE, KADIRIPURA POST KYASAMBALLI HOBLI, KGF TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT-563114. 4. SRI VENKATARAMANAPPA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS S/O MEKALAKODAPPA Digitally signed by DHANALAKSHMI MURTHY Location: HIGH COURTOF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32074 WP No. 35713 of 2019 R/AT VENKATAPURA VILLAGE KONGANAPALLI POST RAMAKUPPAM MANDALAM KUPPAM TALUK CHITTOR DISTRICT, A P-516259. 5. VENKATARAMA REDDY AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS S/O MUNISWAMY REDDY R/AT A MOTHAKAHALLI VILLAGE KADIRIPURA POST KYASAMBALLI HOBLI, KGF TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT-563 114 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. B P RADHA, AGA FOR R1 & R2: SRI. UMESH B N, ADVOCATE FOR R4 & R5: R3 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE R-2 DEPUTY TAHASILDAR, BANGARPET TALUK, BANGAPET R2 VIDE ANNEXURE-D TRANSFERRING THE KATHA OF THE PROPERTY BEARING SY NO.146 MEASURING 4 ACRES 26 GUNTAS OUT OF LAND MEASURING 5 ACRES 01 GUNTAS WITH COSTS. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 2. In this petition, the petitioner is assailing the order passed by the respondent No.2 at Annexure-D, transferring the khata of the subject land. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32074 WP No. 35713 of 2019 3. Having taken note of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the petitioner is having an efficacious remedy under Section 136(2) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 (for short ‘the Act’). 4. In that view of the matter, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to avail the efficacious remedy before the Competent Authority. 5. With this observation, the writ petition is accordingly disposed of. 6. It is made clear that since the petitioner is relegated to approach the Competent Authority under Section 136(2) of the Act, the period spent by the petitioner before this Court, be condoned under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963. Sd/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE HA LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 45