- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34347 WP No. 15912 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.15912 OF 2026 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. NAGARAJU K. S/O LATE M. KARIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, RESIDING AT MEDAHALLI VILLAGE, BHIDARAHALLI HOBLI, BENGALURU EAST TALUK, BENGALURU - 560 049. 2. SRI. K. SATHISH S/O LATE M.KARIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, RESIDING AT MEDAHALLI VILLAGE, BHIDARAHALLI HOBLI, BENGALURU EAST TALUK, BENGALURU - 560 049. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. G. KRISHNA MURTHY, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. VISWANATHA N.S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER-1 BENGALURU URBAN, GROUND FLOOR, K.G.ROAD, BENGALURU 560-009. Digitally signed by CHAYA S A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34347 WP No. 15912 of 2026 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU NORTH SUB-DIVISION, KANDAYA BHAVAN, K.G.ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 009. 3. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR BENGALURU EAST TALUK, KRISHNARAJAPURAM, BENGALURU - 560 036. 4. SMT. VENKATAMMA SINCE DEAD BY HER LRS. SMT.MUNIYAMMA D/O LATE VENKATAPPA, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS. 5. SMT. MUNILAKSHMAMMA D/O LATE VENKATAPPA, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS. 6. SMT. MUNIVENKATAMMA D/O LATE VENKATAPPA, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS. 7. SMT. RATHNAMMA D/O LATE VENKATAPPA, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS. 8. SRI. SAKAPPA S/O LATE VENKATAPPA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS. 9. SMT.PARVATHAMMA D/O LATE VENKATAPPA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS. SRI.MUNIYAPPA SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS I.E., RESPONDENTS NO.6 AND 7. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34347 WP No. 15912 of 2026 10. SRI.M.CHANDRAPPA S/O LATE V.MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS. 11. SRI. M. MANJUNATH S/O LATE V.MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS. RESPONDENTS NO.4 TO 11 ARE RESIDING AT NO.94, NEAR OM SHAKTHI TEMPLE, KANAKAPPA LAYOUT, MEDAHALLI VILLAGE, VIRGONAGAR POST, BHIDARAHALLI HOBLI, BENGALURU EAST TALUK, BENGALURU-560 049. 12. SMT. M. CHIKKAMUNIYAMMA D/O LATE VENKATAPPA, W/O LATE THATHYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/AT DHARMARAYA TEMPLE, KUMBARA BEEDHI, J ANGAMAKOTE VILLAGE AND POST, SHIDLAGHATTA TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT. 13. SRI. JAYARAMA S/O LATE NAGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS. 14. SRI. LOKESHA S/O LATE NAGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, RESPONDENTS NO.13 AND 14 ARE RESIDING AT SY.NO.97/1, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34347 WP No. 15912 of 2026 HIRANDAHALLI VILLAGE, BHIDARAHALLI HOBLI, BENGALURU EAST TALUK, BENGALURU-560 049. 15. SMT.RAMAKKA W/O LATE KRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, RESIDING AT MEDAHALLI VILLAGE, VIRGONAGAR POST, BHIDARAHALLI HOBLI, BENGALURU EAST TALUK, BENGALURU-560 049. 16. SMT. K. PRAMILA D/O LATE M.KARIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, RESIDING AT NAMAGONDLU VILLAGE, D.PALYA HOBLI, GOWRIBIDANURU TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT. 17. SMT. K. LAKSHMINARASAMMA D/O LATE M.KARIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, RESIDING AT VARAVANI VILLAGE, MANCHENAHALLI HOBLI, GOWRIBIDANURU TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT. 18. SMT. K. MANJULA D/O LATE M.KARIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 46YEARS, RESIDING AT MADAGONDANAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, DODDABALLAPURA TALUK, DODDABALLAPURA DISTRICT. 19. SMT. K.CHANDRAKALA D/O LATE M.KARIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34347 WP No. 15912 of 2026 RESIDING AT MEDAHALLI VILLAGE, BHIDARAHALLI HOBLI, BENGALURU EAST TALUK, BENGALURU - 560 049. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SPOORTHY HEGDE N., HCGP FOR R1 TO R3; SRI. L. RAVIKUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R16 TO R19; SRI. BRYEN STIENBESS, ADVOCATE FOR R4 TO R12; NOTICE TO R13 AND R14 DISPENSED WITH) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 04.11.2022 AND 12.03.2025, PASSED BY THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU NORTH SUB-DIVISION, BENGALURU IN R.A. (BE). NO.65/2013-14 FOUND AT ANNEXURE-H8 AND J RESPECTIVELY TO THE WRIT PETITION AND ALSO THE ORDER DATED 19.05.2026 WHICH WAS CONFIRMED BY THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER-1, BENGALURU URBAN, IN REVISION PETITION NO. 156/2025 FOUND AT ANNEXURE-L TO THE WRIT PETITION. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34347 WP No. 15912 of 2026 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER 1. In this Writ Petition, petitioners are assailing the orders dated 04.11.2022, 12.03.2025 in RA(BE)No.65/2013-14 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Bengaluru North Sub-Division, Bengaluru as per Annexures-H8 and J respectively, and the order 19.05.2026 passed by the Special Deputy Commissioner- 1, Bengaluru Urban District, in Revision Petition No.156/2025 found at Annexure-L. 2. Sri. G. Krishna Murthy, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri. Viswanatha N.S., learned counsel for the petitioners, submitted that the private respondents herein are the vendors of the petitioners. Learned Senior Counsel, by referring to registered Sale Deed dated 28.05.1947(Annexure- A), contended that the petitioners have purchased the land in question from subsequent vendors and accordingly, he submitted that the suit in O.S.No.1674/2021 filed by The private respondents herein came to be rejected and as such RFA No.917/2024 was preferred before this Court and until the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34347 WP No. 15912 of 2026 rights of the parties are crystallised in the aforesaid appeal, the finding recorded by the respondent - authorities cannot be sustained with and accordingly, sought for interference of this Court. 3. Per contra, Sri. Bryen Stienbess, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.4 to 12, submitted that as there is a discrepancy in so far as survey number of the land in question which had been purchased by the father of the petitioners as per Annexure-D and in this regard, he submitted that the original land bearing Sy.No.99 was re-assigned with new survey number as 97/1, 98/2 and 99/4 and therefore, as there is discrepancy in so far as re-assigning the survey number of the land in question is concerned and therefore, the matter is pending consideration before this Court and as such, sought for dismissal of the Writ Petition. 4. Sri. Spoorthy Hegde N., learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent Nos.1 to 3, sought to justify the impugned orders. 5. In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on careful consideration - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34347 WP No. 15912 of 2026 of the writ papers would indicate that the petitioners are claiming right over the property in question as per the registered Sale Deed dated 03.02.1949 (Annexure-B1) and the registered Sale Deed dated 01.02.1954 (Annexure-C1). It is also to be noted that the private respondents herein have preferred suit in O.S.No.1674/2021 which came to be rejected by the competent Civil Court and as such, the private respondents herein have preferred appeal in RFA No.917/2024. In that view of the matter, since rights of the parties is yet to be crystallised in the aforementioned proceedings, I am of the view that, the finding recorded by respondent No.1 interfering with the mutation entries based on the registered Sale Deeds as noted above is incorrect and accordingly, I pass the following: ORDER (i) The Writ Petition is allowed. (ii) The impugned order dated 19.05.2026 in Revision Petition No.156/2025 (Annexure-L) passed by the Special Deputy Commissioner-1, Bengaluru Urban District, and the - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34347 WP No. 15912 of 2026 orders dated 04.11.2022, 12.03.2025 in RA(BE)No.65/2013-14 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Bengaluru North Sub- Division, Bengaluru as per Annexures-H8 and J respectively, in so far as the petitioners herein are concerned, are accordingly set aside, and respondent No.3 is directed to enter the name of the petitioners in the mutation register if no change has been effected as on today, and also it is made clear that rights of the parties is subject to the outcome of the Judgment and Decree that may be passed by this Court in RFA No.917/2024. SD/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE sac List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14