- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32790 WP No. 7243 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO. 7243 OF 2024 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. RAJANNA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, S/O LATE NAGAPPA, 2. SRI. MUNIRAJU, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, S/O LATE NAGAPPA, 3. SRI. ANANDAMURTHY, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, S/O LATE CHIKKANAGAPPA, ALL ARE R/AT SUGGATTA VILLAGE, JALA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH (ADDL) TALUK, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT - 562 157. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. MURALI N., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT, BEHIND KANDAYA BHAVANA, K G ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 009. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, Digitally signed by CHAYA S A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32790 WP No. 7243 of 2024 BANGALORE NORTH SUB DIVISION, KANDAYA BHAVANA, K G ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 009. 3. THE TASHILDAR, BENGALURU NORTH (ADDL) TALUK, YELAHANKA, BENGALURU - 560 064. 4. SRI. GOPALAPPA, S/O LATE KEMPANNA, AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS, 5. SRI. CHIKKAAPPAYANNA, S/O LATE HOSAHALLI KEMPANNA, AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS, RESPONDENT NO.4 AND 5 ARE BOTH R/AT SUGGATTA VILLAGE, JALA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH (ADDL) TALUK, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT - 562 157. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.B.P.RADHA, AGA FOR R1 TO R3; SRI.PRABHULING K NAVADGI, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI.P.M.NARAYANASWAMY, ADVOCATE FOR R4 AND R5) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THAT THE ORDER DATED 16.01.2024 PASSED BY THE R-1 IN RP NO. 227/2020 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE - V; SET ASIDE THAT THE ORDER DATED 18.12.2016 PASSED BY THE R-2 IN RA (BNA)132/2016-17 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE - R AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32790 WP No. 7243 of 2024 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, learned Senior Counsel Sri. Prabhuling K. Navadagi appearing on behalf of the respondents No.4 & 5 and learned AGA for respondents No.1 to 3. 2. Having taken note of the submissions made by the learned counsel representing the parties and on careful consideration of the impugned order at Annexures - V and R, passed by respondents No. 1 and 2 respectively, would indicate that the mutation has been made based on the registered sale dated 10.02.1971 (Annexure –F) and in that view of the matter, I am of the view that no interference is called upon in this petition. However, it is open for the petitioners to establish their right over the property in question in a manner known to law. With this observation, the Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32790 WP No. 7243 of 2024 Pending I.As. do not survive for consideration, accordingly, dismissed. Sd/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE BVK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22