SRI. B V RAMAREDDY v. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS
WP/4190/2020 · 2026-07-01
E S Indiresh
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 27311 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 27311 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32696 WP NO.4190 OF 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 01ST DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.4190 OF 2020 (KLR-RR/SUR) BETWEEN:
SRI. B.V. RAMAREDDY S/O VENKATARAMAREDDY, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, MANCHINEELLAKOTE VILLAGE, NELAVANKI HOBLI, SRINIVASAPURA TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 135. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. G.M. NATARAJ, ADVOCATE) AND:
1.
THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS KOLAR DISTRICT, KOLAR - 563 101.
2.
THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KOLAR DISTRICT, KOLAR - 563 101.
3.
THE TAHSILDAR SRINIVASAPURA TALUK, SRINIVASAPURA - 563 135.
4.
SRI. MARAPPA REDDY B.M.
S/O LATE MUNISHAMY REDDY, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/AT BATTUVARIPALLY, MAJARA MANCHINEELLAKOTE VILLAGE.
NELAVANKI HOBLI,
Digitally signed by CHAYA S A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
- 2 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32696 WP NO.4190 OF 2020
SRINIVASAPURA TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 135.
5.
SRI. B.M. PAPIREDDY S/O MADDIREDDY, AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS, R/AT BATTUVARIPALLY, MAJARA MANCHINEELLAKOTE VILLAGE, NELAVANKI HOBLI, SRINIVASAPURA TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 135.
6.
SRI. RAMAPPA S/O LATE TIRUMALAPPA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/AT GOWDATHATAGADDAPALLI VILLAGE, NELAVANKI HOBLI, SRINIVASAPURA TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 135.
7.
SRI. SHIVANNA S/O LATE TIRUMALAPPA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/AT GOWDATHATAGADDAPALLI VILLAGE, NELAVANKI HOBLI, SRINIVASAPURA TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 135.
8.
SRI. VENKATARAMANA REDDY S/O LATE B.M. NARAYANA REDDY AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, R/AT BATTUVARAPALLY, MAJARA MANCHINEELLAKOTE VILLAGE, NELAVANKI HOBLI, SRINIVASAPURA TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 135.
9.
SOMASHEKARA REDDY S/O LATE B.M. NARAYANA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/AT BATTUVARAPALLY, MAJARA MANCHINEELLAKOTE VILLAGE, NELAVANKI HOBLI,
- 3 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32696 WP NO.4190 OF 2020
SRINIVASAPURA TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 135. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SPOORTY HEGDE N., HCGP FOR R1 TO R3;
SRI. N. MURALI, ADVOCATE FOR R4;
V/O DATED 01.10.2021, NOTICE TO R5 TO R9 IS DISPENSED WITH.
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 13TH JUNE, 2017 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 IN APPEAL NO.06/2015-16 VIDE ANNEXURE-F AND ORDER DATED 23RD SEPTEMBER, 2019 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2-DEPUTY COMMISSIONER IN REVISION PETITION NO.05/2017-18 VIDE ANNEXURE-G;
AND ETC.
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
In this petition, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 13th June, 2017 (Annexure-F) passed by the respondent No.1 and order dated 23rd September, 2019 (Annexure-G) passed by the respondent No.2.
2. Heard Sri. G.M. Nataraj, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner; Sri. Spoorthy Hegde N., learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 3; and Sri. N. Murali, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.4.
- 4 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32696 WP NO.4190 OF 2020
3. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on perusal of the averments made in the writ petition, it is forthcoming that the petitioner is challenging the
order dated 13th June, 2017 (Annexure-F), wherein the respondent No.1, directed the Assistant Director of Land Records, Kolar Sub-Division, Kolar to conduct survey, phodi and durasth in respect of the subject land. Thereafter, the order dated 13th June, 2017 (Annexure-F) passed by the respondent No.1 has been challenged before the respondent No.2 in Revision Petition. The respondent No.2, by order dated 23rd September, 2019 (Annexure-G), dismissed the revision petition and as such, confirmed the order passed by the respondent No.1. Therefore, taking into consideration the observation made by the respondent No.1 in the impugned order, I am of the view that no interference be called for in this petition. Accordingly, writ petition is dismissed.
SD/- (E.S. INDIRESH) JUDGE ARK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 47