- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33230 WP No. 35894 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.35894 OF 2025 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. UMASHANKAR M. S/O MUNIYAPPA M., AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/AT BHODANAHOSAHALLI VILLAGE, SAMETHANAHALLI, HOSKOTE TALUK-562114 BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. B.M. ARUN, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. PRADEEP KUMAR R.H., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT AT BEERASANDRA-562114. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, DODDABALLAPURA SUB-DIVISION DODDABALLAPURA-562163. Digitally signed by CHAYA S A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33230 WP No. 35894 of 2025 3. THE TAHSILDAR HOSAKOTE TALUK, HOSAKOTE-562114. 4. SHANTHAMMA, W/O LATE VEERABADRA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS R/AT DODDADUNNASANDRA VILLAGE, ANUGONDANAHALLI HOBLI, HOSAKOTE TALUK-562114. 5. NANJAREDDY S/O LATE APPANNA REDDY AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, R/AT DODDADUNNASANDRA VILLAGE, HOSKOTE TALUK,-562114 BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT. 6. MUNIREDDY S/O LATE APPANNA REDDY AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS R/AT DODDADUNNASANDRA VILLAGE, HOSKOTE TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562114. 7. VENKATARAMANA REDDY S/O LATE APPANNA REDDY AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS R/AT DODDADUNNASANDRA VILLAGE, HOSKOTE TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562114. 8. NARAYANA REDDY S/O LATE APPANNA REDDY AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33230 WP No. 35894 of 2025 R/AT DODDADUNNASANDRA VILLAGE, HOSKOTE TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562114. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SPOORTHY HEGDE N., HCGP FOR R1 TO R3; SRI. PRITHVEESH M., ADVOCATE FOR R4; V/O DATED 12.06.2026 NOTICE TO R5 TO R8 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 31.07.2025 PASSED IN REVISION PETITION NO.86/2023 BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 VIDE ANNEXURE-A. 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. In this Writ Petition, petitioner is assailing the order dated 31.07.2025 in Revision Petition No.86/2023 passed by respondent No.1 as per Annexure-A to the Writ Petition. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33230 WP No. 35894 of 2025 3. Sri. B.M. Arun, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, referring to the finding recorded by both the authorities, submitted that respondent No.2 vide order dated 17.02.2023 in R.A.(HO):89/2020-21 (Annexure-G2) has rightly come to the conclusion that there are two sale deeds in respect of the same land in question and suit in O.S.No.1051/2023 (Annexure-H) is pending consideration before the competent Civil Court and therefore, submitted that mutation cannot be changed after 54 years and accordingly, sought for interference of this Court. 4. Per contra, Sri.Prithveesh M.K., learned counsel representing respondent No.4 submitted that the suit is only in respect of the 18 guntas of land out of 1 acre 34 guntas and therefore, relief is claimed in the suit does not have any bearing on the change of khata in so far as the land in question is concerned and accordingly, supports the order passed by respondent No.1 at Annexure-A to the Writ Petition. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33230 WP No. 35894 of 2025 5. Sri. Spoorthy Hegde N., learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3, sought to justify the impugned order. 6. In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, on careful consideration of the writ papers would indicate that the petitioner is claiming right over the property as per the registered Sale Deed dated 14.10.1963 in respect of the land to an extent of 1 acre 16 guntas and on the other hand, he is also claiming right over the property based on the registered Sale Deed dated 20.06.1966. It is to be noted that after 54 years, suit is filed in O.S.No.1051/2023 and the same is pending consideration before the competent Civil Court, wherein rights of the parties have to be ascertained based on their registered Sale Deeds referred to above. In that view of the matter, I am of the view that, respondent No.1 has committed an error in remanding the matter to respondent No.3 for further action in the matter. Therefore, I find force in the submission made by the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33230 WP No. 35894 of 2025 learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and accordingly, pass the following: ORDER (i) The Writ Petition is allowed. (ii) The order dated 31.07.2025 in R.P.No.86/2023 (Annexure-A) on the file of respondent No.1 is hereby set aside and the parties are directed to await for the Judgment and Decree that may be passed by the competent Civil Court in O.S.No.1051/2023 and thereafter approach the revenue authorities. SD/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE sac List No.: 1 Sl No.: 58