- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010474372019 NC: 2026:KHC:53182 WP NO.51578 OF 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.51578 OF 2019 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. D. VENKATA SHETTY SINCE DECEASED, REP. BY LRS. 1(a). DEVARAJAMMA W/O LATE VENKATA SETTY, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS. 1(b). K.V. PUSHPALATHA D/O LATE VENKATA SETTY, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS. 1(c). K.V. VARADARAJU S/O LATE VENKATA SETTY, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS. 1(d). K.V. NALINI D/O LATE VENKATA SETTY, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS. 1(e). K.V. MANJUNATH S/O LATE VENKATA SETTY, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS. ALL ARE RESIDING AT: BASAVANAGUDI STREET, K.R. PET TOWN, K.R. PET, MANDYA DISTRICT – 571 426. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. YASHWANTH NETHAJI N.T., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. K.V. NARASIMHAN, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by CHAYA S A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010474372019 NC: 2026:KHC:53182 WP NO.51578 OF 2019 AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU – 560 001. 2. THE TAHSILDAR K.R. PET TALUK, K.R. PET, MANDYA DISTRICT – 571 426. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER PANDAVAPURA SUB-DIVISION, PANDAVAPURA, MANDYA DISTRICT – 571 434. 4. SRI. P.J. KESHAVAMURTHY S/O P.K. JAYAKRISHNA, AGE: MAJOR, R/O PURA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, K.R. PET TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT – 571 426. 5. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, PANADAVAPURA SUB-DIVISION, PANDAVAPURA, MANDYA DISTRICT – 571 434. 6. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER MANDYA DISTRICT, MANDYA. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHAMANTH NAIK, AGA FOR R1 TO R3, R5 AND R6; SRI. S.V. PRAKASH, ADVOCATE FOR R4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010474372019 NC: 2026:KHC:53182 WP NO.51578 OF 2019 QUASH THE ORDER DATED 24TH MARCH, 2015 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 IN CASE NO.R.A./R.MIS/14/2010-11 VIDE ANNEXURE-E AND THE ORDER DATED 30TH JULY, 2019 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENTS NO.6 IN CASE NO.RA.MIS:07/2015 VIDE ANNEXURE-J AND QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN CASE NO.R.A./R.MIS/14/2010-11 ON THE FILE OF THE RESPONDENT NO.3. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER In this petition, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 24th March, 2015 (Annexure-E) passed by the respondent No.3 in Case No. R.A./R.MIS/14/2010-11 and order dated 30th July, 2019 (Annexure-J) passed by the respondent No.6 in Case No.RA.MIS:07/201; inter alia sought for quashing the entire proceeding in case No.R.A./R.MIS/14/2010-11 pending before the respondent No.3. 2. Heard Sri. Yashwanth Nethaji N.T., learned counsel on behalf of Sri. K.V. Narasimhan, appearing for petitioners; Sri. Shamanth Naik, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1 to 3, 5 and 6; and Sri. S.V. Prakash, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.4. - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010474372019 NC: 2026:KHC:53182 WP NO.51578 OF 2019 3. Sri. Yaswanth Nethaji N.T., learned counsel appearing for petitioners contended that the impugned orders passed by the respondent-Authorities suffers from infirmity as the possession of the subject land is with the petitioners. He further submits that the Original Suit No.170/1995 filed by the petitioner Venkata Shetty is decreed and same was confirmed in Regular Appeal No.24/2007 before the First Appellate Court and in Regular Second Appeal No.2859/2007 before this Court. Accordingly, he contended that the initiation of enquiry by the respondent-Authorities is contrary to the judgment and decree passed by the Civil Court. Therefore, he sought for interference of this Court to quash the proceedings before the respondent No.3. 4. Per contra, Sri. S.V. Prakash, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.4 contended that the respondent No.4 purchased the land bearing Survey 77/2 to an extent of 4 acres from one Subbamma on 10th October, 1994 and therefore, the petition deserves to be dismissed. 5. Sri. Shamanth Naik, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1 to 3, 5 and 6 sought to - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010474372019 NC: 2026:KHC:53182 WP NO.51578 OF 2019 justify the impugned orders passed by the respondent- Authorities. 6. In the light of submission made by learned counsel appearing for the parties and on perusal of the letter dated 11th October, 2010 (Annexure-D) addressed by the respondent No.2 to the respondent No.3, it is forthcoming that the proceedings have been initiated against the petitioner under Section 136(2) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act (for short, hereinafter referred to as ‘KLR Act’). In the said letter dated 11th October, 2010 (Annexure-D), it is stated that the land bearing Survey No.77 Block 1 was granted in favour of the petitioner Venkata Shetty during the year 1961-62, however, the petitioner was not in possession of the same despite the fact that the Saguvali Chit has been issued during the year-1995 and therefore the respondent No.2 initiated the proceedings before the respondent No.3 under Section 136(2) of the KLR Act in Case No.R.A./R.Mis/14/2010-11 (Annexure-E). The said proceedings under Section 136(2) of the KLR Act was questioned before the respondent No.6 in revision petition bearing No.RA.Mis:07/2015, wherein the respondent No.6-Deputy Commissioner dismissed the revision petition and directed the - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010474372019 NC: 2026:KHC:53182 WP NO.51578 OF 2019 respondent No.3 to continue the proceedings and decide the matter. 7. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties, it is not in dispute that the petitioner Venkata Shetty filed Original Suit No.170/1995 on the file of the Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.), K.R. Pete seeking relief of declaration and permanent injunction against the father of the respondent No.4 herein in respect of the subject land and the said suit came to be decreed on 28th August, 2003 (Annexure-A) and same was confirmed by judgment and decree dated 11th July, 2007 (Annexure-B) passed in Regular Appeal No.24/2006 on the file of the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) and JMFC., K.R.Pete and before this Court, by judgment and decree dated 19th January, 2010 (Annexure-C) passed in Regular Second Appeal No.2859 of 2007. Therefore, I am of the view that the petitioners were in possession of the subject land. In that view of the matter, the proceedings under Section 136(2) of the KLR Act initiated against the petitioners alleging that they are not in possession of the subject land is bad in law. In the backdrop of these aspects, I am of the view that the revenue authorities have no jurisdiction to decide the civil rights of the parties and therefore - 7 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010474372019 NC: 2026:KHC:53182 WP NO.51578 OF 2019 the entire impugned proceedings initiated under Section 136(2) of the KLR Act is required to be quashed. Accordingly, I pass the following: O R D E R (i) Writ Petition is allowed; (ii) Order dated 24th March, 2015 (Annexure-E) passed by the respondent No.3 in Case No.R.A/R.Mis/14/2010-11 and order dated 30th July, 2019 (Annexure-J) passed by the respondent No.6 in Case No.RA.Mis:07/2015 are hereby set-aside; consequently, the proceedings in Case No.R.A./R.Mis/14/2010-11 before the respondent No.3 are hereby quashed; (iii) The respondent No.2 is directed to enter the name of the petitioners in the revenue records in respect of the subject land forthwith. SD/- (E.S. INDIRESH) JUDGE ARK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11