- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1858 WP No. 107129 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO. 107129 OF 2024 (KLR-RR/SUR) BETWEEN: LATIFSAB S/O. MODISAB NASHIPUDI, AGE. 64 YEARS, R.F. SHETTER ONI, NO.66, KUNDAGOL, DISTRICT. DHARWAD-581113. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. C.R.HIREMATH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. ABDUL RAHIMAN GOUSAMIYA MULLA AGE: 51 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, 2. MAHAMAD RAFIQ GOUSAMIYA MULLA AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, 3. MAHAMAD RASID GOUSAMIYA MULLA AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, 4. SALIM GOUSAMIYA MULLA AGE: 47 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, 5. MAHABOOBI W/O. ADAMASAB MULLA AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, 6. H.KHADASAB DAVALATSAB CHANNAPUR DECEASED BY HIS LR’s., BABAJAN S/O. KHADSAB CHANNAPUR AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, 7. AZEEJ S/O. KHADSAB CHANNAPUR AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, MANJANNA E Digitally signed by MANJANNA E Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2026.02.16 12:54:04 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1858 WP No. 107129 of 2024 ALL ARE THE RESPONDENTS NO. 1 TO 7 ARE R/O: SHETTER ONI, KUNDAGOL, TQ: KUNDAGOL, DISTRICT: DHARWAD-581113. 8. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR LAND RECORDS AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE TO THE OFFICE OF DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DHARWAD-580001. 9. THE REGIONAL JOINT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS, BELAGAVI DIVISION, BELAGAVI-590001. 10. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS KUNDAGOL TALUK, DIST. DHARWAD-581113. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SANTOSH D.NARGUND, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R7; SMT. NANDINI B.SOMAPUR, AGA FOR R8 TO R10) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDERS NO. REV/SR-13/2023-24 DATED 15.02.2024 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.9 AND THE ORDER IN CTS/RTS/APPEAL-06/2017-18, DATED 22.12.2020, PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.8 AS PER ANNEXURE-A AND A1 RESPECTIVELY AND CONSEQUENTLY SEEKING TO SET ASIDE THE ENTRIES IN RESPECT OF CITY SURVEY NUMBER 2235, MEASURING 19 SQ METER AND 2236 MEASURING 32 SQ METERS BOTH ARE SITUATED IN KUNDAGOL TALUK, DHARWAD DISTRICT, AS PER AT ANNEXURE-B AND B1; 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:1858 WP No. 107129 of 2024 ORAL ORDER The petitioner has approached this Court calling in question the order passed by the revenue authorities, whereby, the entries relating to certain city survey numbers have been sustained. Brief facts: 2. The petitioner along with the other family members had instituted O.S.No.59/2015, seeking partition and separate possession in respect of the city Sy.No.2230. During the pendency of the said suit, all the parties, who are the family members, voluntarily entered into a compromise before the Lok Adalath, which came to be accepted by the Court. The suit was accordingly decreed in terms of the compromise and the decree has attained finality. 3. The compromise decree records the division of city Sy.No.2230 by metes and bounds, allotting specific portion with defined extents and boundaries to the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1858 WP No. 107129 of 2024 respective sharers. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the city Sy.Nos.2235 and 2236 are illegal, fictitious and without authority of law. It is urged that the original property was only city Sy.No.2230 and that the compromise decree does not contemplate or authorize creation of such survey numbers. On this premise, the petitioner asserts that the revenue authorities have exceeded their jurisdiction and the impugned entries and orders deserves to be set aside. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 7 submits that the revenue authorities are purely consequential to the compromise decree passed in O.S.No.59/2015. It is submitted that once the Civil Court has effected a final partition and allotted specific portions to the sharers, the revenue authorities are bound to reflect the same in the revenue records. It is further contended that the petitioner being a party to the compromise, cannot dispute the consequences following therefrom. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1858 WP No. 107129 of 2024 5. This Court has carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. 6. It is undisputed that the petitioner was party to O.S.No.59/2015 and that the suit was decreed in terms of a compromise before the Lok Adalath. The compromise decree evidences a final partition by metes and bounds, allotted specific portion to the family members. 7. The compromise decree has not been challenged and has attained finality. Once a Civil Court decree determining partition and allotment of property attains finality, the same is binding on all the parties. The assignment of separate city survey numbers pursuant to such partition is ministerial and fiscal exercise, undertaken only to give effect to the Civil Court decrees. Such revenue entries reflect the factual position on ground. The petitioner, having consented to the compromise and derived benefit thereunder, cannot be permitted to approbate and reprobate by challenging the consequential revenue - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1858 WP No. 107129 of 2024 authorities. Accepting such a contention would amount to reopening a concluded civil adjudication which is impermissible. 8. The revenue authorities, in the impugned orders, have rightly confined themselves to examining whether the entry is flow from a compromise decree and have correctly held that they do. This Court finds no jurisdictional error, perversity or illegality in the approach adopted by the authorities. In view of the compromise decree passed in O.S.No.59/2015 and the fact that the revenue entries are only consequential thereto, the petitioner's challenge is wholly misconceived, therefore, the writ petition deserves to be dismissed. Accordingly, the writ petition is hereby dismissed. Sd/- JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA AT Ct:VH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31