- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35661 WP No. 20535 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO.20535 OF 2026 (GM-ST/RN) BETWEEN: RAMESH BHAT, S/O LATE KESHAV BHAT, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/AT RAJANKUNTE VILLAGE, HESARAGHATTA HOBLI, BANGALORE NORTH TALUK, BANGALORE - 560 088. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. KALYAN R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, VIKAS SOUDHA, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001. REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY. 2. INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION AND COMMISSIONER OF STAMPS (IGRC), KANDHAYA BHAVAN, K.G.ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001. 3. SENIOR SUB-REGISTRAR, O/O OF THE ASSISTANT SUB REGISTRAR, YELAHANKA, BENGALURU - 560 064. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.MOHAMMED JAFAR SHAH, AGA) Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35661 WP No. 20535 of 2026 THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A) QUASH THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT DATED 16.1.2026 BEARING NO.UNOKA/YELAHANKA/627/2025-26 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 AS PER ANNEXURE- A TO THE WRIT PETITION AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ ORAL ORDER 1. Learned AGA accepts notice for respondent Nos.1 to 3. 2. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: “WHEREFORE, the petitioner humbly prays that this Hon'ble court may be pleased to: a) To issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ or direction and to quash the impugned endorsement dated 16.1.2026 bearing No. UNOKA/YELAHANKA/627/2025-26 issued by the respondent No.3 as per Annexure- A to the writ petition. b) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ or direction by directing the respondent No.1 to 3 to accept the court before the 11 Addl. Civil Judge, Bangalore Rural District at Bangalore in Ex.No.28/2022 as per Annexure-E sale - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35661 WP No. 20535 of 2026 deed for the registration without insisting upon production of the 11-e sketch and further issue directions to make necessary changes in Cauvery -2 software to receive the sale deed of the petitioner through court commissioner by making necessary changes without insisting upon for production or uploading of 11-e sketch. c) To pass such other order/s as deems fit by this Hon'ble court under the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity.” 3. The petitioner had entered into an agreement of sale dated 16.09.2013 to purchase the property bearing Survey No.46/1 measuring 1 acre 01 guntas out of 23 guntas situated at Addigonahally Village, Hessarghatta Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk. Since, the vendor did not come forward to execute the sale, a suit in OS.No.1028/2019 for specific performance had been filed, which came to be decreed in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner, thereafter, filed Execution petition No.28/2026. When the Commissioner was appointed to execute the sale deed in favour of the petitioner, in pursuance of - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35661 WP No. 20535 of 2026 which, the sale deed came to be executed at Annexure-E. When the same was presented for registration before respondent No.3, respondent No.3 rejected the registration on the ground that 11-E sketch has not been produced. 4. This Court in the case of Dattaram M.Raikar Vs. State of Karnataka in W.P.No.107782/2025 DD. 17.11.2025 has held that the Sub-Registrar cannot refuse registration of a sale deed for want of 11-E sketch when there is a court decree which has been passed. The said decision would apply on all force to the present matter. 5. In that view of the matter, this Court passes the following ORDER (i) The writ petition is disposed of. (ii) A certiorari is issued, the impugned endorsement dated 16.01.2026 bearing - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35661 WP No. 20535 of 2026 No.UNOKA/YELAHANKA/627/2025-26 issued by respondent No.3 at Annexure-A is quashed. (iii) A mandamus is issued directing the respondents to consider the sale deed submitted by the petitioner without insisting on 11-E sketch and register the same within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. (iv) The registration shall, however, be subject to the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of G. Ramachar Vs. State of Karnataka. Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE PB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14