- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010587062026 NC: 2026:KHC:46488 WP No. 26479 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO. 26479 OF 2026 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. SANJEEVAMMA SINCE DEAD BY LRS., SMT. NAGARATHNAMMA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS W/O LATE B.M. NAGARAJU 2. MR. ERASAPPA AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS S/O LATE MUNINANJAPPA @ CHIKKAMUNINANJAPPA AND LATE SMT. SANJEEVAMMA 3. MR. MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS S/O LATE MUNINANJAPPA @ CHIKKAMUNINANJAPPA AND LATE SMT. SANJEEVAMMA 4. MR. MUNIERASAPPA, AGED ABORT 60 YEARS S/O LATE MUNINANJAPPA @ CHIKKAMUNINANJAPPA AND LATE SMT. SANJEEVAMMA PETITIONERS 1 TO 4 ARE R/A BILEKAHALLI VILLAGE, BG ROAD, BEGUR HOBLI, Digitally signed by NANJUNDACHARI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010587062026 NC: 2026:KHC:46488 WP No. 26479 of 2026 BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK BENGALURU – 560 076. …PETITIONERS (BY SMT. S.B.LAKSHMAMMA, ADV.) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU URBAN DIVISION BEHIND KANDAYA BAVANA, KG ROAD, BENGALURU-09. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BENGALURU SOUTH SUB-DIVISION KANDAYA BAVANA, KG ROAD BENGALURU-09. 3. THE TAHSILDAR BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK KANDAYA BAVANA, KG ROAD BENGALURU-09. 4. SHRI. SRINIVASA REDDY SINCE DEAD (AC ORDER SHOWS DEAD) SMT. ANASUYAMMA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS W/O LATE SRINIVASA REDDY (AC ORDER SHOWS DEAD) RESPONDENT 4 IS RESIDING AT NO.20/A, BANASHANKARI NILAYA 1ST MAIN ROAD, 4TH CROSS, NS PLAYA NEW ANJANEYA SWAMY PALYA BG ROAD, BENGALURU. 5. SHRI. PERIYANNA (FATHERS NAME NOT SHOWN) MAJOR IN AGE (SINCE DEAD) SHRI. CHIKKAPAPANNA (FATHERS NAME NOT SHOWN AGE NOT SHOWN) - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010587062026 NC: 2026:KHC:46488 WP No. 26479 of 2026 R/OF BILEKAHALLI VILLAGE, BEGUR HOBLI BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK -560 076. 6. SRI. N. SATHYANARAYANA, MAJOR S/O LATE M. NARASIMHAIAH 7. SHRI. M.S. SRIDHARA, MAJOR IN AGE S/O SRINIVASA SHETH RESPONDENTS 6 TO 7 ARE BILEKAHALLI VILLAGE, BG ROAD, BEGUR HOBLI, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK BENGALURU - 560 076. 8. MR. ANAND S/O LATE BASAPPA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, NO.188, BILEKAHALLI DHARMARAYA TEMPLE ROAD B.G. BENGALURU-560 076. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SKANDA R.K. RAO, ADV. FOR R1 TO 3) THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, IS PRAYING TO (I) QUASH ANNEXURE-A ORDER PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT IN RP NO.699/2017 DATED 21.4.2026; (II) QUASH ANNEXURE-B ORDERS PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN RA(S) NO. NO.24/2014-2015 DATED 28.07.2016 AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010587062026 NC: 2026:KHC:46488 WP No. 26479 of 2026 ORAL ORDER Learned AGA accepts notice for respondent Nos.1 to 3. 2. In this petition, the petitioners are assailing the order dated 21.04.2026 passed by respondent No.1 (Annexure-A) and the order dated 28.07.2016 passed by respondent No.2 (Annexure-B). 3. Smt.S.B.Lakshmamma learned counsel appearing for the petitioners referred to Annexure-E and submitted that, the appeal was preferred under Section 136(3) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 (for short, ‘the Act’) against the respondents, wherein during the pendency of the appeal, respondent Nos.4 and 8 died. However, no LRs were brought on record and therefore submitted that the order passed by the respondent- authorities requires to be interfered with, as the order has been passed against the dead persons, which is nullity in law, and therefore sought for interference of this Court. - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010587062026 NC: 2026:KHC:46488 WP No. 26479 of 2026 4. Per contra, learned AGA submitted that, the change of khatha has been made pursuant to the registered Will dated 24.10.1996 and therefore, no interference is called for in this writ petition. Accordingly, sought for dismissal of writ petition. 5. In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, it is the grievance of the petitioners herein that the order impugned has been passed against the dead persons. However, the perusal of the findings recorded by both the authorities would indicate that, the khatha has been made in favour of respondent No.8 herein based on the registered Will dated 24.10.1996. It is forthcoming that the petitioners and the respondents belong to the same village. In this regard, respondent No.8 is claiming his right over the property based on a registered instrument i.e., the registered Will dated 24.10.1996. - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010587062026 NC: 2026:KHC:46488 WP No. 26479 of 2026 6. In that view of the matter, following the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of TARACHANDRA VS. BHAWARLAL AND ANOTHER, reported in 2025 SCC Online SC 2902 and as such, I do not find any merit in the submissions made by learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Accordingly, there is no perversity in the orders passed by the respondent- authorities. 7. It is also to be noted that, as per the arguments advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, as Periyanna and Sanjeevamma were dead, however the remaining respondents therein were the petitioners before this Court. In that view of the matter, as the petitioners are claiming right over the property, I am of the view that, the said submission made by learned counsel appearing for the petitioners cannot be accepted. 8. Needless to say that, it is open for the petitioners herein to establish their right over the land in - 7 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010587062026 NC: 2026:KHC:46488 WP No. 26479 of 2026 question, in a manner known to law, in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court referred to above. 9. Accordingly writ petition stands dismissed. Sd/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE NC CT:bms List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29