- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010222542022 NC: 2026:KHC:47092 WP No. 10341 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT PETITION NO. 10341 OF 2022 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: SMT. K. MUNIYAMMA @ LAKSHMI W/O K.M. RAJU AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, R/AT NO.2, 8TH CROSS 33RD MAIN ROAD, J.P. NAGAR BENGALURU - 560 078. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. DINESH GAONKAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. PRAMEELA W/O SRINIVAS REDDY AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/AT HALE CHANDAURA ATTIBELE HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK BENGALURU DISTRICT - 562 106. 2. SRI. PRABHAKAR S/O LATE SIDDA REDDY AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/AT HEELALIGE VILLAGE ATTIBELE HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT - 562 106. Digitally signed by ANNAPURNA G Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010222542022 NC: 2026:KHC:47092 WP No. 10341 of 2022 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT KANDHAYA BHAVAN, K.G. ROAD BENGALURU - 560 009. 4. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BENGALURU SOUTH SUB DIVISION KANDHYAYA BHAVAN, K.G. ROAD BENGALURU - 560 009. 5. THE TAHSILDAR ANEKAL TALUK ANEKAL - 562 106. 6. THE DEPUTY TAHASILDHAR NADA KACHERI, ATTIBELE ATTIBELE HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562 106. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. Y.S. HANUMANTHA REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. UMA SHANKAR M.N, ADVOCATE FOR R2; SRI. SANTOSH RAJ DESHMUK, AGA FOR R3 TO R6) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDERS DTD 01.02.2022 PASSED BY THE R3 IN REVISION PETITION 71/2016-17 ANNEXURE-A AND THE IMPUGNED MUTATION ANNEXURE-K DTD 8.11.1994 IN RESPECT OF THE LANDS IN SY.NO.182/3 OF BOMMASANDRA VILLAGE ATTIBELE HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK EFFECTED IN FAVOUR OF R2 AND ETC., - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010222542022 NC: 2026:KHC:47092 WP No. 10341 of 2022 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL ORAL ORDER This writ petition is filed challenging the order dated 01.02.2022 passed by respondent No.3-Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru Urban District, Bengaluru in Revision Petition No.71/2016-17. 2. Heard Sri Dinesh Gaonkar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Y.S. Hanumantha Reddy, learned counsel for respondent No.1, Sri Uma Shankar M.N., learned counsel for respondent No.2 and Sri Santoshraj Deshmukh, Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.3 to 6. 3. The case of the petitioner is that her grandfather, Sri Huccha alias Hucchappa, is the owner of 9 guntas of land in Survey No.182/3 of Bommasandra - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010222542022 NC: 2026:KHC:47092 WP No. 10341 of 2022 Village, Attibele Hobli, Anekal Taluk, Bengaluru, and his name continued in the revenue records for several years till 1993-1994. However, the Tahsildar, without issuing any notice to the petitioner, who is the granddaughter of Sri Hucchappa, vide M.R.No.5/1994-95, entered the name of respondent No.2-Sri Prabhakar in the revenue records, recording that Sri Thimmareddy had died 30 years ago, that he had two sons and that respondent No.2 had inherited the property. 4. The contention of the petitioner is that, while effecting M.R.No.5/1994-95, the Tahsildar ought to have verified the revenue records and ascertained in whose name they in fact stood instead of mearly recording that the revenue records standing in the name of Sri Thimmareddy were factually incorrect. However, the revenue records were standing in the name of Sri Hucchappa, the grandfather of the petitioner. 5. It is to be noticed that the order of the Tahsildar was assailed by the petitioner before the - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010222542022 NC: 2026:KHC:47092 WP No. 10341 of 2022 Assistant Commissioner. The Assistant Commissioner, vide order dated 25.05.2016, set aside M.R.No.5/1994-95. Respondent No.2 assailed the same before respondent No.3-Deputy Commissioner and respondent No.3-Deputy Commissioner, while exercising revisional power, allowed Revision Petition No.71/2016-17 by recording reasons that there is a sale deed dated 18.12.1967 and that, based on the same, there was a partition between the parties in O.S.No.405/2013. 6. It is to be noticed that, while removing the name of Sri Hucchappa, the grandfather of the petitioner, from the revenue records, by virtue of M.R.(IHC) No.5/1994-95, no notice had been issued to the legal heirs of Sri Hucchappa. 7. It is also to be noticed that respondent No.1 is claiming title based on the sale deed. However, the revenue authorities are required to consider the case of both sides and take an appropriate decision with regard to the entry of names in the revenue records insofar as - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010222542022 NC: 2026:KHC:47092 WP No. 10341 of 2022 Survey No.182/3, to the extent of 9 guntas of Bommasandra Village, Attibele Hobli, Anekal Taluk, Bengaluru is concerned. In the absence of any notice, the jurisdictional Tahsildar has entered the name of Sri Prabhakar in the revenue records, which is impermissible. Hence, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i) The writ petition is allowed. ii) The impugned order dated 01.02.2022 passed by respondent No.3-Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru Urban District, Bengaluru, in Revision Petition No.71/2016-17 is hereby set aside. Consequently, M.R.No.5/1994-95 is hereby set aside. iii) The jurisdictional Tahsildar shall hear the petitioner and the respondents on merits. The parties are permitted to place all relevant materials before the Tahsildar to - 7 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010222542022 NC: 2026:KHC:47092 WP No. 10341 of 2022 substantiate their respective contentions and the Tahsildar shall pass orders in accordance with law. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE SHS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25