- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2414-DB RP No. 617 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL REVIEW PETITION NO. 617 OF 2024 BETWEEN: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY DEPT. OF LAND RECORDS VIDHANA SOUHDA BENGALURU-560 001 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT MANGALURU-575 001 …PETITIONERS (BY SMT. SHWETA KRISHNAPPA, AGA) AND: FR. VALERIAN FERNANDES S/O LATE LIGORY FERNANDES AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS Digitally signed by BANGALORE ANJANAPPA KRISHNA KUMAR Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2414-DB RP No. 617 of 2024 PARISH PRIEST R/AT. ST ANTHONY CHURCH, NARAVI NARAVI POST BELTHANGADY TALUK DAKSHINA KANNADA-574 214 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. KESHAVA BHAT A., ADVOCATE) THIS RP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 114 R/W ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE PRAYING THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO ALLOW THIS REVIEW PETITION, BY REVIEWING THE ORDER DATED 27.03.2024 IN WA No.1561/2023 (KLR-RES) PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY, AND ALLOW THE APPROPRIATE AUTHORITY TO CARRY OUT THE FAIR VALUATION AS PER THE GRANT RULES. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR HEARING ON INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION, 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:2414-DB RP No. 617 of 2024 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN) Heard the Shwetha Krishnappa, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the review petitioners and Sri. Keshava Bhat A, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 2. Learned Additional Government Advocate vehemently contends that the order under review is erroneous inasmuch as, it has not considered the fact, that the market value of the property in question had admittedly not being paid. Therefore, the grant itself would fructify only after the payment of the market value. It is therefore contended that the market value is now to be fixed in accordance with the current market value and it is only thereafter that the grant can be said to have fructified. 3. We have considered the contentions raised as well as the findings of the Division Bench of this court in the judgment under review. The Division Bench has clearly held in paragraph 4 of the judgment specifically reads as follows: - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2414-DB RP No. 617 of 2024 "4. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the appeal papers, we are inclined to grant indulgence in the matter broadly agreeing with the submission made by the counsel for the appellant. There is already the Grant Order and that the same is affirmed in appellant's appeal decided by the Appellate Tribunal. What has been left over for consideration at the hands of the authorities was only the question of the payment for the subject grant. When there is statutory Tribunal's order, relegating the appellant to the Assistant commissioner for seeking a fresh grant is not justified." 4. It is therefore clear that there is a finding made by the Division Bench after considering the provisions of the statute as well as the contentions raised that the grant remains undisturbed and that the directions issued by the learned Single Judge are therefore not proper. 5. Though vehement arguments have been raised by the learned Additional Government Advocate, we find that there is no error apparent on the face of the record which requires correction and that in a review petition, we cannot re-consider or re-appreciate the matter which has already been considered in the judgment under review. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2414-DB RP No. 617 of 2024 6. In the above view of the matter, we find no merit in the review petition. The review petition therefore fails, the same is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- (ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE RAK List No.: 4 Sl No.: 7