SRI VENKATESH v. THE REGIONAL JOINT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS
WP/5308/2026 · 2026-08-19
E S Indiresh
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 36220 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 36220 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
HC-KAR
CNR: KAHC010118992026 NC: 2026:KHC:44780 WP No. 5308 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.5308 OF 2026 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN:
1. SRI VENKATESH S/O LATE MARIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS. 2. SRI. HOMBALE GOWDA S/O LATE MARIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS. 3. SRI. NARAYANAPPA S/O LATE. MARIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS. ALL ARE RESIDING AT BOGANAPALYA, BACHENAHATTI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, MAGADI TALUK, BANGALORE SOUTH DISTRICT, (PREVIOUSLY RAMANAGAR) - 562 120. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SURESH.P.,ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE REGIONAL JOINT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS (JDLR)
Digitally signed by CHAYA S A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
- 2 -
HC-KAR
CNR: KAHC010118992026 NC: 2026:KHC:44780 WP No. 5308 of 2026
BANGALORE DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF SURVEY, SETTLEMENT AND LAND RECORDS (SSLR), K.R. CIRCLE, BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS (DDLR) DISTRICT OFFICE COMPLEX, B.M. ROAD, RAMANAGARA - 562 159. 3. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS (ADLR) MAGADI TALUK OFFICE, MAGADI, BANGALORE SOUTH DISTRICT (PREVIOUSLY RAMANAGAR) - 562 120. 4. THE THASILDAR MAGADI TALUK OFFICE, MAGADI, BANGALORE SOUTH DISTRICT (PREVIOUSLY RAMANAGAR) - 562 120. 5. SRI. RANGAPPA S/O LATE MUNIRANGAYYA AND HONAMMA AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS RES AT BOGANAPALYA, BACHENAHATTI VILLAGE, MAGADI TALUK, BANGALORE SOUTH DISTRICT (PREVIOUSLY RAMANAGAR) - 562 120. 6. SRI. MUNIRAJAYYA S/O LATE. MUNIRANGAYYA AND HONAMMA AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS RES AT NO.1, 2ND MAIN ROAD,
- 3 -
HC-KAR
CNR: KAHC010118992026 NC: 2026:KHC:44780 WP No. 5308 of 2026
5TH CROSS, GOVINDARAJANAGAR, BANGALORE NORTH, BENGALURU - 560 040. 7. SRI. KRISHNAPPA S/O LATE. MUNIRANGAYYA AND HONAMMA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS RES AT BOGANAPALYA, BACHENAHATTI VILLAGE, MAGADI TALUK, BANGALORE SOUTH DISTRICT (PREVIOUSLY RAMANAGAR) - 562 120. 8. SRI. B.M. NARASEGOWDA S/O LATE. MUNIRANGAYYA AND HONAMMA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS RES AT NO. 111, 4TH CROSS ROAD, KAMATH LAYOUT, MACHOHALLI, BENGALURU - 560 091. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SPOORTHY HEGDE N., HCGP FOR R1 TO R4;
SRI. V.B. SHIVAKUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R5, 6 AND 8;
R7 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED )
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 25-11-2025 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO. 1 IN SURVEY REVISION NO. REV/RMN- 49/2025. PRODUCED VIDE (ANNEXURE - A); AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
- 4 -
HC-KAR
CNR: KAHC010118992026 NC: 2026:KHC:44780 WP No. 5308 of 2026
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER
In this writ petition, the petitioners are assailing the order dated 25.11.2025, produced as Annexure-A, passed by respondent No.1, inter-alia, seeking a direction to the respondent-authorities to restore the entries in the revenue records in terms of the registered Partition Deed dated 04.09.2021, produced as Annexure-H series and Annexure-J.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 3. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and upon careful consideration of the impugned order dated 25.11.2025, it is evident that respondent No. 1 has remanded the matter to respondent No. 3 for reconsideration of the issue afresh, particularly in view of the fact that the grant
- 5 -
HC-KAR
CNR: KAHC010118992026 NC: 2026:KHC:44780 WP No. 5308 of 2026
made in favour of the petitioners' vendor itself is under challenge. 4. Since the matter has been remanded to the competent authority for fresh consideration, and it is also noted that the petitioners has filed O.S. No. 292 of 2024 before the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC Magadi, seeking declaratory relief with consequential relief, I am of the opinion that no interference is called for in the present writ petition. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. 6. However, it is open to the petitioners to approach the revenue authorities after conclusion of the proceedings in O.S. No. 292 of 2024. SD/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE
SB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 68