- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010015532016 NC: 2026:KHC:36082 WP No. 5383 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO. 5383 OF 2016 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: SMT. LEELAMMA W/O LATE VENKATASWAMY REDDY AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS R/A RAMASAGARA VILLAGE BOMMASANDRA POST ATTIBELE HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK BANGALORE DISTRICT-560099 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SUMANA BALIGA M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BANGALORE DISTRICT BANGALORE-560001. 2. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BANGALORE SOUTH SUB DIVISION BANGALORE-560001. 3. TAHASILDAR ANEKAL TALUK ANEKAL-560106. 4. SMT GOWRAMMA D/O LATE NANJUNDA REDDY & SAKAMMA Digitally signed by CHAYA S A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010015532016 NC: 2026:KHC:36082 WP No. 5383 of 2016 5. SRI R N NARAYANA REDDY S/O LATE NANJUNDA REDDY & SAKAMMA 6. SRI R N SHIVARAMA REDDY S/O LATE NANJUNDA REDDY & SAKAMMA 7. SRI R N NAGARAJA REDDY S/O LATE NANJUNDA REDDY & SAKAMMA R4 TO R7 ARE R/O RAMASAGARA VILLAGE BOMMASANDRA POST, ATTIBELE HOBLI ANEKAL TALUK BANGALORE DISTRICT-560099. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.B.P.RADHA., AGA FOR R1 TO R3 SRI. G.PAPIREDDY., SR. ADVOCATE FOR SRI. VARUN PAPI REDDY FOR R4 TO R7 V/O DTD. 8/7/2026 AS AGAINST THE LR’S OF DECD R5 WP STANDS DISMISSED) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER IN RP NO.282/2014-15 DTD 6.1.2016 VIDE ANNEXURE-E SETTING ASIDE THE ORDERS OF THE R-2 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER DTD8.12.2014DIRECT THE R-3 TO RESTORE THE ENTRIES IN THE REVENUE RECORDS AS DIRECTED BY THE R-2 IN HIS ORDER DTD18.12.2014 VIDE ANNEXURE-C IN RESPECT OF THE SUBJECT MATTER SURVEY NUMBERS MENTIONED IN THE SCHEDULE AND ETC., - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010015532016 NC: 2026:KHC:36082 WP No. 5383 of 2016 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER In this petition, petitioner is assailing the order dated 06.01.2016 (Annexure-E), passed by respondent No.1 and order dated 08.12.2014 (Annexure-C) passed by the respondent No.2. 2. Heard Smt. Sumana Baliga.M, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner; Smt. B.P.Radha, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondents No.1 to 3 - State and Sri G.Papi Reddy, learned Senior Counsel for Sri Varun Papi Reddy, learned counsel appearing for respondents No.4 to 7. 3. It is contended by Smt.Sumana Baliga.M, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner by referring to the genealogical tree produced therein and submits that the legal representatives of the deceased Sakamma have no authority under law to sell the property as, the - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010015532016 NC: 2026:KHC:36082 WP No. 5383 of 2016 Sakamma herself has relinquished her right in respect of the land in question. Accordingly, sought for interference of the court. 4. Per contra, Sri G.Papi Reddy, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondents No.4 to 7 submits that mutation has been effected based on the registered sale deed dated 27.05.2013 and therefore it is open for the petitioner herein to establish a right over the property in question and therefore sought for dismissal of the petition. 5. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondent - State has sought to justify the impugned order. 6. In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on careful consideration of the impugned order at Annexure-E, dated 06.01.2016 would indicate that the mutation in respect of the land bearing Survey No.58/3 to an extent of 28 guntas - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010015532016 NC: 2026:KHC:36082 WP No. 5383 of 2016 of Ramasagara Village, Anekal Taluk, was made based on the registered sale deed dated 27.05.2013. 7. In that view of the matter, I am of the opinion that, the mutation has been made in accordance with Section 128 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 and therefore no interference is called for in this petition. However, it is open for the petitioner to agitate her rights in respect of land in question, before the competent civil court in a manner know to law. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. SD/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE KLY List No.: 1 Sl No.: 44