- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32791 WP No. 22044 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. 22044 OF 2024 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: SMT. MUNINARAYANAMMA, D/O LATE MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/AT NELLUKUNTE VILLAGE, TUBAGERE HOBLI, ANTARAHALLI POST, DODDABALLAPURA TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT - 561 203. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. N.KHETTY, ADVOCATE AND SMT.AKKAMAHADEVI HIREMATH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560 001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU - 560 001. Digitally signed by CHAYA S A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32791 WP No. 22044 of 2024 3. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, DODDABALLAPUR SUB DIVISION, DODDABALLAPUR, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 560 001. 4. TAHSILDAR, DODDABALLAPUR TALUK, DODDABALLAPUR, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 560 001. 5. ASST. TAHSILDAR, THUBUGERE HOBLI, DODDABALLAPUR TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 560 001. 6. SRI. S. PALAIAH, AGE AND FATHER NAME NOT KNOWN TO PETITIONER, PRESENTLY WORKING AS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU - 560 001. 7. SRI. C. MANJUNATH, FATHER NAME NOT KNOWN, AGED MAJOR, ERSTWHILE ASST. COMMISSIONER, DODDABALLAPUR SUB DIVISION, DODDABALLAPUR, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 560 001. 8. SRI. KRISHNAPPA, S/O GIRIYAPPA, AGED MAJOR, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32791 WP No. 22044 of 2024 CLAIMS TO BE THE RESIDENT OF HEGGADAHALLY VILLAGE, THUBAGERE HOBLI, DODDABALLAPUR TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 560 001. 9. SMT. JYOTHI GOVINDA REDDY, W/O LATE KRISHNA MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/A FLAT NO.1003, ANUJYOTHI APARTMENTS, NO.8, PIPE LINE ROAD, VGS LAYOUT, EJIPURA, VIVEKNAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 047. 10. SRI. KEERTHI SESHA, S/O LATE KRISHNA MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/O NO.356, 5TH MAIN, 4TH AVENUE, NEAR CARMEL GARDEN, PUBLIC SCHOOL TEAHCERS, KORAMANGALA, 1ST BLOCK, BANGALORE - 560 034. 11. SRI. HARRSHA KRISHNA MURTHY, S/O LATE KRISHNA MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/O 834/A, 1ST FLOOR, 100 FEET ROAD, OPP. APEX BANK, INDIRANAGAR, 1ST STAGE, BANGALORE - 560 038. 12. M/S. NPV DEVELOPERES LLP, A PARTNERSHP FIRM, OFFICE AT 647/396, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32791 WP No. 22044 of 2024 5TH FLOOR, BALARAJ ARCADE, WHITEFIELD MAIN ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 056. REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER SRI. VIKRAM NALAGAMPALLI, S/O BALARAJ NALAGAMAPLLI, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS. 13. SMT. PAPAMMA, W/O LATE GIRIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, 14. SMT. RATNAMMA, D/O LATE GIRIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, 15. SRI. NARAYANASWAMY, S/O LATE GIRIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, 16. SMT.MANJULA, W/O SRI. NARAYANSWAMY, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, 17. SRI. DIVAKAR, S/O SRI.NARAYANASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, 18. SRI. SUDHAKAR, S/O SRI. NARAYANASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, 19. SMT. MANJULA, W/O SRI. KRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32791 WP No. 22044 of 2024 20. MASTER SAAGAR, S/O SRI. KRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS, 21. MASTER SRIDHAR, S/O SRI. KRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS, RESPONDENT NO.21 IS MINOR, REPRESENTED BY HIS NATURAL GUARDIAN, FATHER, DEFENDAT NO.8 KRISHNAPPA, RESPONDENTS NO.13 TO 21 ARE R/AT HEGGADAHALLY VILLAGE, THUBAGERE HOBLI, DODDABALLAPURA TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 560 001. AND ALSO KELAGINATHOTA, H.S.GARDEN, 22ND WARD, CHIKKABALLAPURA CITY, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT - 562 101. 22. SRI. K.M.MUNIRAJU, AGED 23 YEARS, S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA, 23. SMT. MAMATHA @ MADHU RANI, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, D/O LATE MUNIYAPPA, 24. SMT. NAVEENA, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, D/O LATE MUNIYAPPA, - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32791 WP No. 22044 of 2024 25. MS. ROOPA, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, D/O LATE MUNIYAPPA, 26. SMT.GANGAMMA, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, W/O LATE MUNIYAPPA, ALL ARE R/AT KANIVEPURA VILLAGE, HEGGADAHALLY POST, THUBUGERE HOBLI, DODDABALLAPUR TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.SPOORTHY HEGDE N., HCGP FOR R1 TO R5; SRI.C.SHANKAR REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R8; SRI.D.R.RAVISHANKAR, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI.S.G.MUNISWAMY GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R12; SRI.SARAVANA S., ADVOCATE FOR R22; NOTICE TO R21, R22, R6, R7, R10, R13 TO R20, R23 TO R26 ARE HELD SUFFICIENT VIDE ORDER DATED 27.08.2024 AND DATED 23.09.2024) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO HOLD AND DECLARE THAT THE ORDER DATED 25.01.2010 IN PROCEEDINGS RRTCR2323/2004-05 PASSED BY THE R-4 IS FABRICATED AND NONEST (ANNX-E) AND ETC., - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32791 WP No. 22044 of 2024 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER Heard the Learned Counsel for the parties. 2. In this petition, petitioner is assailing the Order dated 05.01.2015 (Annexure – H) passed by respondent No. 3, Order dated 27.09.2016 passed by respondent No. 2 (Annexure – J), inter alia sought for direction to respondent No. 3 to consider the representation dated 06.12.1996 21.03.2005, 03.01.2007 and 22.08.2007 produced at Annexure – D Series along with a Mahazar at Annexure - L and a report at Annexure - L1. 3. It is argued by the learned Counsel Sri. N. Khetty appearing for the petitioner that the entire proceedings culminated in the proceedings before respondent No. 2 and 3 is based on a fraudulent document before respondent No. 4 at Annexure – E dated - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32791 WP No. 22044 of 2024 25.01.2010 and therefore it is argued that, the entire proceedings are required to be set aside in this petition. It is also argued by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, by referring to the finding recorded by the respondent-authorities that the land in question has been granted in favour of the father of the petitioner under Grow More scheme and the said aspect has been ignored by the respondent-authorities and accordingly sought for interference of this Court. It is also argued by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner by referring to the proceedings in O.S No. 214/2011 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Doddaballapura, wherein in the said suit, the shares of the petitioner has been allotted by the competent Civil Court and the said aspect of the matter has been ignored by both the respondent-authorities. Further, learned counsel for the petitioner also referred to the order dated 03.02.2025 passed by this Court and submitted that the fraud has been elucidated by the petitioner as to the proceedings - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32791 WP No. 22044 of 2024 before the respondent-authorities as to the land in question. Therefore, learned counsel for the petitioner sought for interference of this Court. 4. Per contra, Sri. D.R. Ravishankar, learned Senior Counsel appearing for respondent No.12, disputes the grant made in favour of the father of the petitioner and also submitted that, finding recorded by both the authorities that, the father of the petitioner himself does not have locus standi to challenge the proceedings as to the land in question and accordingly sought for dismissal of the petition. 5. It is also submitted by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent No.12 by referring to the deed of confirmation dated 13.02.2025 wherein the petitioner herein had executed the registered instrument and also reference has been made in the said confirmation deed as to the W.P.No. 22044/2024 and therefore it is contended that the petitioner does not have any locus - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32791 WP No. 22044 of 2024 standi to challenge the same. It is also argued by the learned Senior Counsel by referring to the Registered- Oppige Patra/ Consent Deed dated 13.08.2024 and submitted that, the respondent-authorities after considering the case on merits rightly passed the impugned order and as such submitted that, the petition requires to be dismissed. 6. Learned HCGP also submitted that the petitioner herein has not produced the original grant certificate issued to the father of the petitioner nor true copy of the same and therefore sought for dismissal of the petition. 7. It is argued by learned counsel Sri. C. Shankar Reddy appearing for respondent No. 8 that suit in O.S. No. 1542/2025 is pending consideration before competent Civil Court and it is open for the petitioner to establish the right over the property in question in the said suit and accordingly sought for dismissal of the petition. - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32791 WP No. 22044 of 2024 8. In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, though the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner raised the ground as to the fraudulent act, said to have been committed by the respondent-authorities, however, in respect of the order passed by the respondent No. 4 at Annexure – E, as well as the perusal of the finding recorded by both the authorities in the impugned order at Annexures - H and J would indicate that the land in question, was belonged to one Nanjapa and the land was not being cultivated for sometime and as such it was, declared as a Phada land. On the other hand, the claim made by the petitioner that the land in question has been granted to the petitioner’s father as per the GMF scheme during 1946-47, however no grant certificate is produced before this Court or before the respondent-authorities. 9. Even in respect of the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner as to the fraudulent act - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32791 WP No. 22044 of 2024 has been made by the respondent-authorities, which requires an enquiry and has to be decided in an appropriate forum and as the disputed question of facts are involved in the said petition. I am of the view that, no interference is called for in this petition in terms of the declaration made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Kerala and Ors. V. M.K. Jose reported in (2015) 9 SCC 433. 10. Smt. Akkamahadevi Hiremath, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has invited the attention of the Court to Annexure - E Memorandum dated 25.01.2010, wherein the very same Tahsildar has revert back as per Annexure- F stating that the said document has not been addressed and signed by her as Tahsildar, Doddaballapura Taluk and further it is contended that, the Tahsildar submitted a report, that the signature is a forged one and the said bogus order was not passed by her and the order in RRT CR No. 2323/2025 is a fraudulent document and therefore sought for interference of this Court. - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32791 WP No. 22044 of 2024 11. The submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as to the Annexure - E, wherein the Tahsildar, has submitted a report to the respondent authorities that her signature has been forged as such and the said aspect is a disputed question of fact which cannot be gone into in this Writ Petition which requires appropriate enquiry before the competent forum. 12. A perusal of the finding recorded by both the authorities and material on record placed before this Court would indicate that no grant certificate has been issued in favour of the father of the petitioner. Even for the sake of argument, this Court directed the learned counsel for the petitioner to produce atleast true copy of the same, however, the reply was that, no grant certificate. In that view of the matter, taking into consideration the finding recorded by both the authorities, and also as the suit in OS No. 1542/2025 which is filed by the petitioner before the competent Civil Court, challenging a registered - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32791 WP No. 22044 of 2024 confirmation deed dated 13.02.2025 is pending consideration before the competent Civil Court, wherein rights of the parties have to be crystallized, I am of the view that, no interference is called for in this Writ Petition. However, it is open for the petitioner to approach the competent authority, after the conclusion of the proceedings in O.S.No. 1542/2025, wherein the rights of the parties could be crystallized in the above suit and accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. SD/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE BVK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23