- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27767-DB WA No. 1444 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF WRIT APPEAL NO. 1444 OF 2025 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRINIVASA, S/O GANGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, 2. SMT. MARAKKA, W/O CHIKKAVENKATAPPA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, 3. SMT.YELLAMMA, W/O CHIKKAKARIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, 4. NAGARAJA, S/O CHOWDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, 5. MAREGOWDA, S/O MUNIHANUMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, 6. HANUMANARASIMAIAH, S/O NARASIMHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, 7. SHIVAJI RAO, S/O CHANDU RAO, AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS, Digitally signed by REKHA R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27767-DB WA No. 1444 of 2025 8. SMT. LAKSHAMMA, W/O MARE GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, 9. MUNIRAJU, S/O MUDDAIAH, AGE ABOUT 66 YEARS, 10. NARASIAH, S/O NARASIMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, 11. BYRAPPA, S/O LATE ERAPPA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, 12. NARASIMHAMURTHY, S/O K. SIDDAMMA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, 13. MUDDURANGAIAH, S/O CHIKKARANGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, 14. RANGAIAH, S/O LATE CHIKKAHANUMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, 15. SMT. BASAMMA, W/O RANGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS, 16. CHIKKANNA, S/O RANGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, 17. L. NARAYANASWAMY, S/O LAKSHMI NARASIMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27767-DB WA No. 1444 of 2025 18. RAJANNA, S/O NAGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, 19. MARANARASIAH, S/O DODDAMUNISWAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, 20. NAGARAJU, S/O PUTTAIAH, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, 21. N. KRISHNAMURTHY, S/O NARASIMHAIAH, AGE ABOUT 61 YEARS, 22. KEMPARAMAIAH, S/O BAIRALINGAIAH, AGE ABOUT 63 YEARS, 23. VENKATACHALAIAH, S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, 24. LAKSHMAPPA (LAKSHMANAPPA), S/O NAGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, 25. MUNIRAMA, (MUNIMARAIAH), S/O DODDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, 26. MUNIYAMMA, W/O LATE RANGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, 27. VENKATASWAMAIAH S/O LATE NAGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS,\ - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27767-DB WA No. 1444 of 2025 28. SHIVANNA, S/O LATE CHANNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS, 29. P THIMMAIAH, S/O PUTTAIAH, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, 30. VENKATARAMAIAH, S/O KADRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, 31. VENKATAPPA, S/O CHIKKAMUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, 32. MARAIAH, S/O MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, 33. MARAPPA, S/O NARASIMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, 34. DODDAHONNAIAH, S/O RANGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, 35. K.L. NARAYANAGOWDA, S/O LAKKANNA, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, 36. SMT. MARAKKA, W/O UMAPATHI, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, 37. KASTURI, W/O RAJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27767-DB WA No. 1444 of 2025 38. NAGARAJU, S/O CHOWDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/AT GANGENAHALLI VILLAGE, MIDACHAIAHANA PALYA VILLAGE AND LAKSHMIPURA VILLAGE, TAVAREKERE HOBLI, BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK, BANGALORE DISTRICT - 562 130. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. VIJAYAKUMAR R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDING, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE - 560 001. 2. THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE DISTRICT. K.G.ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 009. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE SOUTH SUB DIVISION, K.G.ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 009. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK, K.G.ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 009. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27767-DB WA No. 1444 of 2025 5. SYED AMAN, S/O LATE SYED KHASIM SAB DEAD BY LR'S MUBEENA BANU, W/O LATE SYED AMAN, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, 6. SYED MOHAMMED ZAIN, S/O LATE SYED AMAN, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO 23/A, ANNANYA, 1ST BLOCK, 1ST CROSS, J.C.NAGAR, BENSON TOWN, BANGALORE - 560 046. 7. SYED MOHAMMED SALAUDDIN, S/O LATE SYED AMAN, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, R/AT NO 23, KEB ROAD, BENSON TOWN POST, ANNAYAPPA BLOCK, BANGALORE - 560 046. 8. SRI. SYED ARIF, S/O LATE JABBAR, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, 9. SRI. SYED ASIF, S/O LATE JABBAR, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, 10. SYED ABID, S/O LATE JABBAR, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, 11. SMT. MUNEERA BEGUM, W/O LATE. JABBAR, - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27767-DB WA No. 1444 of 2025 AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS RESPONDENT NOS. 8 TO 11 ARE RESIDING AT GANGENAHALLI VILLAGE, TAVAREKERE HOBLI, BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK, BANGALORE - 562 130. 12. SRI. NAGARAJA, S/O OF VEERAPPA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, RESIDING AT VARTHUR VILLAGE, TAVAREKER HOBLI, BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK, BANGALORE - 562 130. 13. SMT. VENKATAMMA, W/O J.KARIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, RESIDING AT GURUVABHAVIPALYA VILLAGE, TAVAREKERE HOBLI, BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK, BANGALORE DISTRICT - 562 130. 14. SMT. ERAMMA, W/O VENKATESHA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, GURUVABHAVIPALYA VILLAGE, TAVAREKERE HOBLI, BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK, BANGALORE DISTRICT - 562 130. 15. B.CHANDRAPPA, S/O BASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, RESIDING AT GANGENAHALLI, TAVAREKERE HOBLI, BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK, BANGALORE - 562 130. …RESPONDENTS - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27767-DB WA No. 1444 of 2025 (BY SRI. B. RAVINDRANATH, AGA FOR R1 TO R4 SRI. DHYAN CHINNAPPA, SR. ADVOCATE FOR SRI. MANJUNATH L.V., ADVOCATE FOR C/R5-R11) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RELEVANT RECORDS AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WP NO.38522/2011(KLR- RES) DATED:23.07.2025 AND GRANT FURTHER RELIEFS TO THE APPELLANTS AND ALLOW THE ABOVE WRIT APPEAL WITH COSTS. 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 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF) This intra-Court appeal is by respondents 12, 16, 18, 20, 24, 27, 29, 30, 34, 37, 39, 46, 48, 50, 54, 55, 56, 61, 62, 63, 66, 68, 70, 72, 75, 79, 81, 83, 84, 86, 87, 89, 91, 92, 96, 97, 98 & 101 in W.P.No.38522/2011, assailing the order dated 23.07.2025 passed by the Writ Court. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27767-DB WA No. 1444 of 2025 2. The Writ Court by means of impugned order, allowed the Writ Petition, set-aside the order passed by the Revenue authorities sought in the prayer, confirming M.R No.6 of 11 of 1981-82 dated 18.03.1981 passed by the Tahsildar, Bengaluru South Taluk, changing the katha of the property bearing No.130 of Gangenahalli Village, Bengaluru South Taluk in favor of the petitioners. 3. The parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Writ Court. 4. Facts germane to file the present appeal are as under: 4.1 The petitioners filed the Writ Petition seeking following reliefs: i. Issue a Writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ and set aside the impugned orders in RP 6/2000-01 dated 25.08.2003 at Annexure-U passed by the second respondent and consequently set aside the order in RA 74/92-93, dated 28.08.1997 passed by the third respondent at Annexure-S. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27767-DB WA No. 1444 of 2025 ii. To pass such other order/s deemed fit by this Hon'ble Court under the circumstances and expediency of the case interest of justice and equity. 4.2 The case of the petitioners before the Writ Court was that, the land bearing Sy.No.130 of Gangenahalli Village, Tavarekere Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluk (erstwhile Magadi Taluk) was originally a Jodi Inam land. One Sri.R.G.Shamanna S/o.Gundurao, made an application seeking occupancy rights before the then Special Deputy Commissioner for Inams Abolition. The application came to be rejected. Against which, an appeal was preferred in No.532, 533 & 534/1966 before the Mysuru Revenue Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal by means of order dated 29.11.1996 allowed the appeal and remanded the matter to the Special Deputy Commissioner for Inams Abolition. Thereafter, the name of the R.G.Shamanna had been effected in Register No.VIII (Annexure-A) showing conferment of occupancy right and Mutation Register - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27767-DB WA No. 1444 of 2025 in MR No.9/1968-69 and IL and RR at at Sl.No.744 as per Annexures-C and E. 4.3 The said R.G.Shamanna sold the entire extent of land granted in favor of one D.V.Padmanabhaiah through a registered Sale Deed. The said D.V.Padmanabhaiah sold the same in favor of Smt.Savitri Devi Memorial Trust (Annexures-D and E). The petitioners herein purchased the property under the register Sale Deed dated 05.02.1981 from Smt.Savitri Devi Memorial Trust (Annexure-F). 4.4 Pursuant to the sale deed, an application was made to the Revenue Authorities for effecting the name of the petitioners, which was accordingly favored by means of entering the name of the petitioner as per M.R. No.6 of 11 of 1981 dated 18.03.1981. 4.5 In the year 1992-1993, the appellants have challenged the order of mutation before the Assistant Commissioner (respondent No.3) by filing - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27767-DB WA No. 1444 of 2025 R.A.No.74/1992-1993. Respondent No.3 by his order dated 28.08.1997 set-aside the mutation entry made in favor of the petitioners and same was the subject matter before this Court in W.P.No.27047/1997 and other connected matters. This Court relegated the petitioners to approach the respondent No.2 under Section 136 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 19641 by means of its order dated 23.07.1999. 4.6 In pursuance of the order dated 23.07.1999, a Revision Petition No.6/2000-01 came to be filed before respondent No.2, which was dismissed vide order dated 25.08.2003. The present Writ Petition has been filed against the order passed by the Revenue Authorities, which we have already extracted above. 4.7 The contention of the appellants /contestant respondents before the Writ Court was that they are 1 Act of 1964, for short - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27767-DB WA No. 1444 of 2025 in possession of the subject land and cultivating the same. Their grievance is that the revenue entries were made in favor of the petitioners i.e., contesting respondents in this appeal, without due consideration of the appellants' claim. However, apart from asserting possession and cultivation, the appellants have not produced any documentary evidence in support of their claim on which they are seeking to challenge the order passed by the Revenue Authorities. 4.8 The Writ Court having considered the rival submissions, came to a conclusion that the contesting respondents in the Writ Petition/ appellants herein have no locus standi to challenge the order of mutation in favor of the petitioners before the Assistant Commissioner and observed that the Revenue Authorities ought to have refrained from entertaining the appeal as they are against the Provisions of the Act of 1964. - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27767-DB WA No. 1444 of 2025 4.9 The Writ Court has further held that once the land has been re-granted by means of the Grant stated supra and the land having been conveyed under various sale deeds starting from Sri.R.G.Shamanna, lastly to the petitioners, cannot now be permitted to contend as Gomal Land belonging to the Government. The Writ Court has stated that the judgment cited by the contesting respondents/ appellants herein are not applicable to the case on hand and relying on the judgment stated in paragraph No.12 of its order, allowed the Writ Petition, setting aside the orders called in question therein and confirmed the mutation in favor of the petitioners. Assailing the said order, the contesting respondents/appellants herein are in this appeal before us. 5. Heard, Sri.Vijaya Kumar.R, learned counsel appearing for the appellants, Sri.Dhyan Chinnappa, learned Senior counsel assisted by Sri.Manjunath.L.V, - 15 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27767-DB WA No. 1444 of 2025 learned counsel for caveator/ respondents 5 to 11 and Sri.B.Ravindranath, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1 to 4. 6. A strange and distinct ground has been raised before us by the appellants for the first time that they have filed Form No.50 for consideration of their unauthorized occupation before the Government and the same were pending for consideration. In that view of the matter, the order passed by the Writ Court comes in the way of their rights being considered. 7. A perusal of the entire order passed by the Writ Court does not reflect the contention now taken by the appellants before us. What was contended before the Writ Court was that, they are in occupation and cultivating the land. Except this nothing has been placed before the Writ Court regarding the claim now being made before us. 8. When queried regarding the locus standi of the appellants herein in preferring the present appeal against - 16 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27767-DB WA No. 1444 of 2025 the order passed by the Writ Court, learned counsel for the appellants is unable to answer the same. However, he reiterated his submission that the appellants are in unauthorized occupation and their application in Form No.50 is pending for consideration. 9. As noticed by the Writ Court, the land having been granted in favor of R.G.Shamanna way back in the year 1966 and the same has exchanged in several hands thereafter by means of conveyance i.e., registered sale deeds and ultimately came in the hands of the petitioners, the land is no more a Government land. In these circumstances, we are unable to comprehend the contentions now taken by the appellants as stated supra. 10. Having found no infirmity in the order passed by the Writ Court, which is based on the registered sale deeds and the provisions of the Act of 1964, we find no ground to interfere with the said order. As the appeal sans merit, it is accordingly dismissed. - 17 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27767-DB WA No. 1444 of 2025 11. In view of dismissal of Writ Appeal, pending interlocutory, if any, stand disposed of. Sd/- (D K SINGH) JUDGE Sd/- (T.M.NADAF) JUDGE TKN List No.: 2 Sl No.: 2 ct-vn