- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3014-DB W.A. No.1146/2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT APPEAL NO.1146/2023 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: DR. SHYLAJA KUMARI WIFE OF SRI. N.S. NAGARAJA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.157, 12TH B CROSS MARUTHI LAYOUT, VIRUPAKSHAPURA BANGALORE - 560097. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SHASHANK R, ADV., FOR SRI. SHARATH N, ADV.,) AND: 1. THE STATE REP. BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT M.S. BUILDINGS, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BANGALORE - 560001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BANGALORE URBAN, K.G.ROAD BANGALORE - 560009. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BANGALORE NORTH SUB-DIVISION SIR. M. VISHWESHWARAIAH BUILDINGS DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI Digitally signed by ARSHIFA BAHAR KHANAM Location: High Court Of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3014-DB W.A. No.1146/2023 BANGALORE - 560001. 4. THE TAHASILDAR BANGALORE NORTH TALUK K.G.ROAD, BANGALORE - 560009. 5. THE TALUK SURVEYOR BANGALORE NORTH TALUK K.G.ROAD, D.C. OFFICE COMPLEX BENGALURU - 560009. 6. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR BMTC, K.H. DOUBLE ROAD BANGALORE - 560027. 7. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS BANGALORE NORTH TALUK K.G.ROAD, D.C. OFFICE COMPLEX BENGALURU - 560009. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SHWETA KRISHNAPPA, AGA FOR R1 TO R5 & R7 SRI. R.V. JAYAPRAKASH, ADV., FOR R6) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE FINAL ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE DATED 31.01.2023 MADE IN W.P.NO.23820/2022 TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE & ETC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3014-DB W.A. No.1146/2023 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) This intra Court appeal is filed challenging the order dated 31.01.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.23820/2022(KLR-RES), wherein the learned Single Judge had disposed of the writ petition by directing the petitioner to file a civil suit seeking appropriate relief. 2. Sri.Shashank R., learned counsel for the appellant submits that Section 61(h) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, bars filing of civil suit and this aspect is not considered by the learned Single Judge. Hence, he seeks to allow the appeal. 3. Sri.R.V.Jayaprakash, learned counsel for the respondent No.6 opposes the writ petition and submits that the petitioner is required to establish her right in a duly constituted suit and until her title is proved she cannot seek the relief, which has been considered by the learned Single Judge and rightly rejected the writ petition, which does not call for any interference. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3014-DB W.A. No.1146/2023 4. Smt.Shweta Krishnappa, learned Additional Government Advocate has filed a memo along with various communications and submits that the authorities intend to consider the application of the appellant and intend to conduct the survey as sought and they have scheduled the survey on 23.01.2026 at 11:00 a.m. She submits that in view of the survey being scheduled to be conducted on 23.01.2026, the writ appeal may be disposed of. 5. We have heard the arguments of learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the respondent No.6 and learned Additional Government Advocate. 6. Though various contentions are raised by the learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel contesting respondent No.6, we are of the view that the appellant has filed a writ petition seeking direction to respondent No.4 or respondent No.7 to conduct an enquiry and rectify the northern boundary in the sketch annexed to Annexure-H. The said prayer cannot be considered in - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3014-DB W.A. No.1146/2023 the light of various contentions. However, the respondent- State has filed a memo indicating that the request of appellant would be considered and they have scheduled survey of the disputed land on 23.01.2026. Hence, we are of the view that this writ appeal is required to be disposed of in view of the survey being carried out by the respondent-State. 7. It is needless to observe that after the survey is conducted, it is open for the parties to work out their remedies in accordance with law. 8. With the above observations, the writ appeal is disposed of. Sd/- (ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE BSR/List No.: 3 Sl No.: 3