Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 46021 (KAR)

SHRI.K.V.VENKATARMANAPPA v. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/1637/2026 · 2026-01-22

R Devdas

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3892 WP No. 1637 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 1637 OF 2026 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: SHRI.K.V.VENKATARMANAPPA S/O. K. M. VARADAPPA, AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS, R/AT. NO.1850, OLD POST OFFICE ROAD, GUNGUTTIPALYA, MULBAGAL TOWN AND TALUK, REP. BY HIS REGISTERED GPA HOLDER SMT. N. SUGUNA, W/O. SRI. T. N. SRIRAMACHARI, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/AT. NO.102, 2ND FLOOR, 1ST MAIN, 3RD F CROSS, BDA LAYOUT, KASTURI NAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 043. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRAKASH TIMMANNA HEBBAR., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, M.S BUILDING, DR AMBEDKAR ROAD BENGALURU - 560 001 BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY. 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, KOLAR DISTRICT, Digitally signed by JUANITA THEJESWINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3892 WP No. 1637 of 2026 KUMBARAHALLI, MULBAGAL ROAD, KOLAR-563 101. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, KOLAR SUB-DIVISION, NEAR COURT CIRCLE, KOLAR-563 101. 4. TAHSILDAR, MULBAGAL TALUK, NH-75, MULBAGAL - 563 101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. NAVYA SHEKHAR., AGA) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS FROM THE TAHSILDAR CONCERNED PERUSE THE SAME HEAR THE PARTIES AND GRANT THE FOLLOWING RELIEFS TO THE PETITIONER AS AGAINST THE RESPONDENTS AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS ORAL ORDER Learned Additional Government Advocate takes notice for all the respondents. 2. The grievance of the petitioner appears to be that the respondent-Deputy Commissioner, Kolar District, at - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3892 WP No. 1637 of 2026 the instance of the local Member of Legislative Assembly is trying to usurp the property belonging to the petitioner. 3. In the considered opinion of this Court, if there is interference, be it at the hands of the Government or the revenue authorities or a private individual, the remedy would lie before a competent Civil Court. 4. If the petitioner has already issued legal notice, then the petitioner has to proceed to institute a suit before the Civil Court to redress his grievance. 5. Writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. 6. Learned Additional Government Advocate is permitted to file Memo of Appearance within a period of four weeks from today. Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE JT/- CT: JL