- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:963 WP No. 100505 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JANUARY 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO. 100505 OF 2026 (KLR-RR/SUR) BETWEEN: 1. SHRI. VEERABHADRA S/O. SHIVAPPA KHADAKBHANVI AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. FARM HOUSE, NEAR MALI TOTAD SCHOOL, HIDKAL, TALUKA RAIBAG, DISTRICT BELAGAVI-591 317. 2. SHRI. MAHADEV S/O. SHIVAPPA KHADAKBHANVI AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. FARM HOUSE, NEAR MALI TOTAD SCHOOL, HIDKAL, TALUKA RAIBAG, DISTRICT BELAGAVI-591 317. 3. SHRI. BASAPPA S/O. SHIVAPPA KHADAKBHANVI AGE: 43 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. FARM HOUSE, NEAR MALI TOTAD SCHOOL, HIDKAL, TALUKA RAIBAG, DISTRICT BELAGAVI-591 317. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. D.B.KARIGAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. GANGAVVA D/O. CHANNAPPA KHADAKBHANVI AGE: 80 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. FARM HOUSE, NEAR MALI TOTAD SCHOOL, HIDKAL, TALUKA RAIBAG, DISTRICT BELAGAVI-591 317. 2. SHRI. CHANNAPPA S/O. SHIVALINGAPPA KHADAKBHANVI, AGE: 33 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. FARM HOUSE, NEAR MALI TOTAD SCHOOL, HIDKAL, TALUKA RAIBAG, DISTRICT BELAGAVI-591 317. GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Digitally signed by GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2026.02.02 09:57:45 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:963 WP No. 100505 of 2026 3. SMT. KASTURI W/O. SHIVALINGAPPA KHADAKBHANVI AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. FARM HOUSE, NEAR MALI TOTAD SCHOOL, HIDKAL, TALUKA RAIBAG, DISTRICT BELAGAVI-591 317. 4. SMT. SAROJINI W/O. YALLAPPA SATTI AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. NAGANUR, TALUKA RAIBAG, DISTRICT BELAGAVI-591 317. 5. SHRI. MALLAPPA S/O. SHIVALINGAPPA KHADAKBHANVI, AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. FARM HOUSE, NEAR MALI TOTAD SCHOOL, HIDKAL, TALUKA RAIBAG, DISTRICT BELAGAVI-591 317. 6. SHRI. REVAPPA S/O. SHIVAPPA KHADAKBHANVI AGE: 70 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. FARM HOUSE, NEAR MALI TOTAD SCHOOL, HIDKAL, TALUKA RAIBAG, DISTRICT BELAGAVI-591 317. 7. THE TAHSILDAR, RAIBAG TALUKA, BELAGAVI DISTRICT-591 317. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. NANDINI B.SOMAPUR, AGA FOR R7) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING THAT THE NECESSARY ORDER OR DIRECTION OR WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS MAY KINDLY BE ISSUED AND THEREBY DIRECTION MAY KINDLY BE GIVEN TO THE RESPONDENT NO.7 NOT TO MUTATE THE NAME OF THE RESPONDENT NO.2 IN THE CONCERNED RECORD OF RIGHTS TILL THE DISPOSAL OF THIS PETITION IN RESPECT OF THE LANDED PROPERTY BEARING ITS NO’S IS 1) RS NO. 253/2, MEASURING 00.29 GUNTAS, 2) R S NO. 253/5 MEASURING 00.24 GUNTAS, 3) RS NO. 253/6 MEASURING 00.12 GUNTAS OUT OF IT 00.04 GUNTAS, SITUATED AT HIDKAL VILLAGE OF RAIBAG TALUKA OF BELAGAVI DISTRICT, IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE, VIDE ANNEXURE-B AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:963 WP No. 100505 of 2026 ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioners have approached respondent No.4 calling in question the order dated 21.11.2025 passed by respondent No.7 - Tahsildar, directing mutation of the name of respondent No.2 on the basis of a registered sale deed executed in his favour. 2. At the outset, it requires to be noticed that the mutation proceeding under the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, are only fiscal in nature and are meant for the purpose of maintenance of revenue records. The Tahsildar or the appellate revenue authorities have no jurisdiction to examine the validity, legality or otherwise of a registered sale deed, nor can questions relating to title be gone into in such proceedings. 3. If the petitioner disputes the validity of the registered sale deed, the only remedy available in law is to institute appropriate civil proceedings before a competent Civil Court. So long as the sale deed remains valid and subsisting, the revenue authorities are bound to give - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:963 WP No. 100505 of 2026 effect to the same by carrying out consequential mutation entries. The petitioner cannot, under the guise of challenging a mutation order, seek to indirectly assail the registered sale deed in proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 4. In view of the matter, this Court finds no justification to entertain the present writ petition. 5. Accordingly the writ petition is dismissed reserving liberty to the petitioner, if so advised, to approach the appropriate Authority or the competent Civil Court in accordance with law. 6. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claim. Sd/- JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA gab Ct:VH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29