- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5368-DB WA No. 163 of 2025 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. 163 OF 2025 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. SHARADAMMA W/O LATE NARAYANAPPA, AGED 76 YEARS, R/AT NO.923, KONAPPANA AGRAHARA, KRISHNAREDDY LAYOUT, ELECTRONIC CITY POST, HOSUR ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 100. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. NAGENDRA M, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT, BENGALURU – 560 001. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BENGALURU SOUTH SUB DIVISION, KANDHAYA BHAVAN, BANGALORE – 560 001. Digitally signed by SREEDHARAN BANGALORE SUSHMA LAKSHMI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5368-DB WA No. 163 of 2025 3. THE TAHASILDAR BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK, KANDHAYA BHAVAN, BANGALORE – 560 001. 4. N. MANJUNATH S/O LATE NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/AT NO.1184, GOVINDA SHETTY PALYA, ELECTRONIC CITY POST, BANGALORE – 560 010. 5. SAMPANGI S/O LATE LINGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, R/AT NO.140, 24TH MAIN ROAD, 13TH CROSS, 2ND STAGE, J P NAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 078. 6. V SATHYA MURTHY S/O LATE VISHWANATH, AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS, R/AT NO.7/1, NEW NO.135, INFANTRY ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MOHAMMAD JAFFAR SHAH, AGA) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO CORRECT THE OPERATIVE PORTION OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 15/03/2017, PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS COURT IN WP NO.5521/2017 AND ETC., THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5368-DB WA No. 163 of 2025 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 against the judgment and order dated 15.03.2017 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.5521/2017. 2. The writ appeal has been filed with delay of 2028 days. The reasons stated in the affidavit accompanying the application I.A.No.1/2025, seeking condonation of delay of 2028 days, are stated in paragraph Nos.2 and 3, which read as under:- “2. I state that, Respondent No:4 had filed Writ Petition bearing W.P No:5521/2017 against the Appellant aggrieved by the Deputy Commissioner order vide R.P 179/2015-16 dated: 2/1/2017. The said Writ Petition was dismissed on direction stating that the revenue entries will be made subject to the result of the declaration suit that the petitioner had filed in O.S.1458/2016 before the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural District. But the above suit in trial court is of injunction suit not declaration suit. The Hon'ble Single Judge of High Court of - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5368-DB WA No. 163 of 2025 Karnataka has got inference that the above suit was in the nature of Declaration and the said order is misused by the Respondent No:4 in the above suit. 3. I state that, I have filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 in the Trial Court to reject the plaint filed by the Respondent No:4 vide O.S.1458/2014 stating that the title of the suit schedule property is in cloud and the only relief for the Respondent No:4 as per Apex Court in Anathula Sudhakar V/s P.Buchi Reddy & others case is to file declaration suit. But the Respondent No:4 had misused the order of the said Single Judge of Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka for my application under Order 7 Rule 11 filed before the trial court in 2024 stating that Hon'ble High Court had directed that revenue entries to be made subject to the result of O.S.1458/2016 then I have realised the above mistake in the order portion of the said Single Judge in Writ Petition No:5521/2017. Hence filed this Writ Appeal. Therefore the delay in filing this Appeal is not wilful and intentional. It is only after misuse by the Respondent No:4 in the year 2024 for my application, I am before this Hon'ble court for the said correction.” 3. The aforesaid reasons stated in the affidavit accompanying the application seeking condonation of delay are neither sufficient nor convincing nor bona fide. We do not see any reason to entertain the writ appeal, which suffers from - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5368-DB WA No. 163 of 2025 gross delay of 2028 days and unexplained latches. Therefore, the application I.A.No.1/2025 is rejected. 4. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal on the ground of delay and latches. Sd/- (D K SINGH) JUDGE Sd/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE BSS List No.: 2 Sl No.: 3