- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5504-DB WA No. 27 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH WRIT APPEAL NO. 27 OF 2026 (LR) BETWEEN: K JAYAMMA W/O LATE THIMMEGOWDA (WRONGLY STATED IN MEMORANDUM OF WRIT PETITION AS THIPPEGOWDA) AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS RESIDENT OF KODIYALAKARENAHALLI DHAKALE NO. 08 CHENNAMMANHALLI BIDADI HOBLI RAMANAGARA TALUK AND DISTRICT - 562 129 …APPELLANT (BY SMT. SRUTI C., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE M.S. BUILDING BANGALORE - 560 001 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER LAND TRIBUNAL RAMANAGARA TALUK RAMANAGARA-562 159 PRESCRIBED AUTHORITY FOR DISPOSAL OF APPLICATION UNDER FORM NO.7A 3. NARAYANAPPA S/O LATE KARIGOWDA AGED MAJOR Digitally signed by SREEDHARAN BANGALORE SUSHMA LAKSHMI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5504-DB WA No. 27 of 2026 4. KENCHAPPA S/O NARAYANAPPA AGED MAJOR 5. C.N. NARASIMHAIAH S/O LATE C. NARAYANA GOWDA AGED MAJOR RESPONDENT NOS.3 TO 5 ARE R/OF KODIYALAKARENAHALLI DHAKALE CHENNAMMANHALLI BIDADI HOBLI RAMANAGARA TALUK AND DIST-562 129 6. CHITRA SHEKARAMMA W/O LATE KARIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS RESIDENT OF KODIYALAKARENAHALLI VILLAGE HAMLET OF KODIYALAKARENAHALLI BIDADI HOBLI RAMANAGARA TALUK AND DISTRICT-562 129 RAJANNA SINCE DEAD BY LRS 7. PADMAMMA W/O LATE RAJANNA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS 8. VENKATESH S/O LATE RAJANNA AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS 9. KEERTHI KUMAR R. S/O LATE RAJANNA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS RESPONDENT NOS. 7 TO 9 ARE R/AT NO. 105/C KODIYALAKARENAHALLI POST KODIYALAKARENAHALLI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5504-DB WA No. 27 of 2026 RAMANAGARA DIST - 562 109 10. NARAYANAPPA S/O LATE KARIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS 11. MURTHI S/O LATE KARIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS RESPONDENT NOS.10 AND 11 ARE R/OF KODIYALAKARENAHALLI VILLAGE HAMLET OF KODIYALAKARENAHALLI BIDADI HOBLI RAMANAGARA TALUK AND DISTRICT 562 129 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.SRUTI C., ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT APPEAL FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO (i) SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 25.11.2025 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WP No. 19838/2022 (LR) (ii) PASS SUCH OTHER ORDERS/DIRECTIONS AS THIS HONBLE COURT MAY DEEM FIT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN THE INTERESTS OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH) The present intra-court appeal has been filed impugning the judgment and order dated 25.11.2025, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5504-DB WA No. 27 of 2026 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.19838 of 2022. 2. The parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Writ Court, for the sake of convenience. 3. The petitioners filed the writ petition impugning the order dated 19.07.2006, in Case No.LRF/7(A)-472, 350, 467, 466, 477/1999-2000 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, as well as the order dated 08.06.2018, passed in Appeal No.1023/2006 by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as ‘KAT’ for short). 4. During the pendency of the appeal before the KAT, the father of the petitioners’ died on 09.03.2018. The KAT in absence of the representations on behalf of the petitioners / appellants passed the impugned order dated 08.06.2018. 5. The learned Single Judge has noted that the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner dated 19.07.2006, mentioned above is cryptic, laconic, non-speaking as well as - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5504-DB WA No. 27 of 2026 unreasoned. We have also perused the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner. The order is in one paragraph and does not disclose any reason and has been passed in cryptic and laconic manner. 6. Considering the aforesaid fact that the KAT has passed an order exparte, after the death of the father of the petitioners and the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner was cryptic, laconic and unreasoned order, the learned Single Judge has allowed the writ petition and set- aside the impugned orders, i.e., the orders passed by the KAT, as well as the Assistant Commissioner and directed the Assistant Commissioner to proceed with the matter afresh, keeping all the contentions of the parties open. 7. We do not see that the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge requires an interference from this Court. Considering the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner is cryptic, laconic and unreasoned order and the KAT has passed the order exparte, after the death of the father of the petitioners. In view - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5504-DB WA No. 27 of 2026 therefore, we dismiss the writ appeal and direct the parties to appear before the Assistant Commissioner in compliance of the impugned judgment passed by the learned Single Judge. However, it is made clear that the parties shall maintain the status-quo till the Assistant Commissioner decides the matter afresh as directed by the learned Single Judge. All the contentions of the parties are kept open. Sd/- (D K SINGH) JUDGE Sd/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE JJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5