- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5745-DB WA No. 1838 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU WRIT APPEAL NO. 1838 OF 2025 (KLR-RR/SUR) BETWEEN: SRI. SHANKARAPPA S/O LATE PAPANNA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, RESIDING AT AMBEDKAR NAGAR, KOLAR, KOLAR DISTRICT-563 122. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. THILAKRAJ S.V., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KOLAR DISTRICT, KOLAR-563 101. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, KOLAR SUB DIVISION, KOLAR-563 101. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, KOLAR TALUK, KOLAR-563 101. 4. SRI. MOHAMMED SADIQ, S/O LATE SHAIK AHAMMAD, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.801, 2AC, 1ST BLOCK, Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5745-DB WA No. 1838 of 2025 HRBR LAYOUT, KALYANNAGAR, BENGALURU-560 043. 5. SRI. MUNISWAMY @ SUBBAIAH, S/O A.K. KALAPPA, AGED ABOUT YEARS, 2ND CROSS, KOTE, KOLAR-563 101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MOHAMMAD JAFFAR SHAH, AGA FOR R1 TO R3; SRI. V. LAKSHMINARAYANA, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. CHAND PASHA, ADVOCATE FOR R4) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO: (A) SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE DATED 10/07/2025 DISMISSING THE W.P.NO.19352/2024; AND ETC. 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 MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH) The present intra Court appeal has been filed impugning the judgment and order dated 10.07.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP No.19352/2024. 2. The appellant/petitioner filed the aforesaid writ petition challenging the order dated 16.07.2024 passed by - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5745-DB WA No. 1838 of 2025 the Deputy Commissioner, Kolar District, Kolar in R.A.P.No.101/2024 rejecting the petitioner's revision against the mutation entries carried out in favour of the respondent No.4 in respect of the property in question on the basis of the registered sale deed in his favour. 3. The respondent No.4 had purchased the property in question from its owner vide Sale Deed dated 04.03.1977. On the basis of the aforesaid sale deed, the mutation has been effected in the name of the respondent No.4. 4. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the name of the village in the sale deed is wrongly mentioned. 5. However, the learned counsel for the respondent No.4 submits that the boundaries have been marked in Survey No.92, Kasaba Hobli, Kolar Rural Village, Kolar Taluk and District in respect of 1 acre 16 guntas of land in the aforesaid survey number as per the sale deed. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5745-DB WA No. 1838 of 2025 6. This Court cannot decide a disputed question of fact. If the appellant is aggrieved by the order passed by the Revenue Authorities in respect of marking of the boundaries of the land in Survey No.92, he can take appropriate proceedings to get the boundaries marked in accordance with law. 7. With the aforesaid observations, we dismiss the writ appeal. 8. In view of dismissal of the writ appeal, pending IAs, if any, do not survive for consideration and accordingly, they stand disposed of. Sd/- (D K SINGH) JUDGE Sd/- (TARA VITASTA GANJU) JUDGE TL List No.: 2 Sl No.: 2