- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010196352026 NC: 2026:KHC:52644 WP No. 8957 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO. 8957 OF 2026 (LR) BETWEEN: 1. RAME GOWDA, S/O SANNE GOWDA, SINCE DEAD BY LRS., SMT KALAYANAMMA, W/O. LATE RAME GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, 2. R. KODANDARAMA, S/O. LATE RAME GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, 3. CHALUVARAJU, S/O. LATE RAME GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, ALL ARE R/AT LAKSHAMIPURA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, MYSURU TALUK. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. DIVAKARA P S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 001. Digitally signed by REKHA R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010196352026 NC: 2026:KHC:52644 WP No. 8957 of 2026 2. THE LAND TRIBUNAL, MYSURU TALUK, MYSURU. 3. MARI GOWDA, S/O. LATE THIMMAPPA, SINCE DEAD BY LRS., (RESPONDENT NO. 1(A) TO 1(G) SINGAPPA, S/O. MARI GOWDA, REP BY GPA HOLDER, (S. PARASANA) RESIDING AT NAGANAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, MYSURU TALUK. 4. M. S. RAJANNA S/O. MARIGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, 5. NARAYANNA S/O. MARIGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, 6. VENKATESHA S/O. MARIGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, 7. YASHODHA, W/O. LATE SRINIVASU, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, 8. SAHANA, W/O. LATE SRINIVAS, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, 9. SAGAR W/O. LATE SRINIVAS, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010196352026 NC: 2026:KHC:52644 WP No. 8957 of 2026 RESPONDENT NO.3 TO 9 ARE RESIDING AT NAGANAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, MYSURU TALUK. 10. PUTTANNAIAH, SINCE DEAD BY HIS LR'S SMT. GANGAMMA, W/O. PUTTANNAIAH, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, 11. ASHWATHAMMA, D/O. LATE PUTTANNAIAH, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, RESPONDENT NO.10 AND 11 ARE RESIDING AT HOUSE NO. B/16, 3RD MAIN, VISHVESHWARA NAGAR, PANDAVAPURA TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SHARADHA, AGA FOR R1 & R2) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER WHICH IS ANNX-A DATED:09.03.2023 PASSED BY THE LAND TRIBUNAL MYSURU, AT MYSURU AND ALLOW THE APPLICATION FILED BY PETITIONERS IN FORM NO. 7 CLAIMING OCCUPANCY RIGHT OVER AGRICULTURE LAND MEASURING 1 ACRE, 10 GUNTAS, IN SY NO. 85 OF LAKASHMIPURA VILLAGE, MYSURU TALUK THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010196352026 NC: 2026:KHC:52644 WP No. 8957 of 2026 ORAL ORDER In this writ petition, petitioners are assailing the Order dated 09.03.2023 passed by the Land Tribunal Mysuru, (Annexure-A), rejecting the claim made by the petitioners for accepting Form No.7 to confer occupancy right under the Provisions of Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961. 2. Sri.Divakara P.S, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, submitted that an observation has been made in the impugned order at Annexure-A as to the payment of the gutta by the petitioners herein to the landlord, and the said aspect was ignored by the Tribunal. Accordingly, sought for interference of this Court. 3. Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate has submitted that, the name of the petitioners does not find place in the RTC extracts on the relevant date i.e., on 01.03.1974 and therefore, the claim made by the petitioners cannot be accepted. - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010196352026 NC: 2026:KHC:52644 WP No. 8957 of 2026 4. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on careful consideration of the impugned order would indicate that, the petitioners have not produced any relevant material, to establish that the husband of the petitioner No.1-Ramegowda was cultivating the land in question as on the relevant date i.e., on 01.03.1974. 5. It is also to be noted from the arguments advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners by referring to the gutta receipt, however, the same itself cannot be a basis in the absence of the relevant material to establish the cultivation of the land in question. It is also to be noted from the arguments advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the parties that, the land in question has been sold by the landlord to the original respondent No.3-Marigowda, way back in year 1975. - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010196352026 NC: 2026:KHC:52644 WP No. 8957 of 2026 In that view of the matter, I am of the view that no interference is called for in the said petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is rejected. Sd/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE PK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21