- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9362 WP No. 39292 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 39292 OF 2025 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. PREMA R W/O SIDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, OCCUPATION HOUSEWIFE, R/A NEAR BANASHANKARI TEMPLE, K.H.B. COLONY, EAST BY BANASHANKARI TEMPLE, CHITRADURGA-577501. 2. SRI DYAMAPPA S/O EASHWARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, OCCUPATION AGRICULTURIST, R/A MALASINGANAHALLI VILLAGE, THALYA HOBLI, HOLALKERE TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577526. 3. SRI JAYAPPA S/O EASHWARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, R/A MALASINGANAHALLI VILLAGE, THALYA HOBLI, HOLALKERE TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577526. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. HANDRAL NINGAPPA., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, Digitally signed by JUANITA THEJESWINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9362 WP No. 39292 of 2025 M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560001, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT, CHITRADURGA - 57751. 3. THE SPECIAL ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, CHITRADURGA-2 SUB-DIVISION, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT - 577501. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, HOLALKERE TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT - 577526. 5. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, NADA KACHERI, THALYA HOBLI, HOLALKERE TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT. 6. SRI SHIVAMURTHY G E., S/O EASHWARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/A MALASINGANAHALLI VILLAGE, THALYA HOBLI, HOLALKERE TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT - 577526. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.SHAMANTH NAIK., HCGP FOR R1 TO R5 SRI. SHIVAKUMARAPPA T.C., ADVOCATE FOR R6) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTION QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 09-12-2025 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.2 IN R.P. NO.37/2025 VIDE ANNEXURE-J AND CONSEQUENTIALLY DIRECT RESPONDENT NO.4 TO RETAIN AND CONTINUE THE NAMES OF THE PETITIONERS IN - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9362 WP No. 39292 of 2025 THE RTC PERTAINING TO LAND BEARING SY. NO. 148/6 FOM 148/8,9,10 AND 18/11 OF MALASINGANAHALLI VILLAGE, THALVA HOBLI, HOLALKERE TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT, AS PER M.R. NO. 9/1939-40, M.R. NO.1186/1983-84 AND M.R. NO.9/2003-04 AND SUBSEQUENT PROCEEDINGS AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS ORAL ORDER The petitioners are aggrieved of the impugned order passed by respondent No.2-Special Deputy Commissioner, Chitradurga District, at Annexure ‘J’ dated 09.12.2025. 2. Learned counsel submits that the private respondent No.6 herein filed an appeal under Section 136 (2) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 before the respondent-Assistant Commissioner, Chitradurga Sub- Division in R.A No.338/2022-23 raising a challenge to mutation order in M.R.No.9/2003-04. However, the Assistant Commissioner found that on the basis of registered sale deed dated 05.07.1945, the revenue - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9362 WP No. 39292 of 2025 entries were made in M.R.No.3/1945-46 dated 31.07.1945 and on the basis of succession, the subsequent mutation orders were made in MR No.9/2003-04 and rightly rejected the appeal while directing the private respondent herein to approach a competent Civil Court to seek a declaration of title. However, the Special Deputy Commissioner entertained a revision petition filed under Section 136 (3) of the Act, at the hands of the respondent no.6 herein and not only set aside the order of the Assistant Commissioner, but also directed the Tahsildar to verify the encumbrance certificates pursuant to the registered sale deed of the year 1945 and thereafter proceed in accordance with law. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner is right in his submission that having regard to the chronology of events, when the Assistant Commissioner rightly found that the mutation entries have been made commencing from the year 1945 and thereafter, in terms of the succession, the names of the legal heirs of the original khatedars have - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9362 WP No. 39292 of 2025 been made out in the revenue records, the Deputy Commissioner could not have interfered in the matter to change the mutation entries while considering disputed questions of title. 4. Consequently, the writ petition is allowed while setting aside the impugned order dated 09.12.2025 at Annexure ‘J’ passed by the respondent-Special Deputy Commissioner, Chitradurga District, while directing respondent no.6 to seek a declaration of title at the hands of the competent Civil Court and if such a declaration is made in favour of respondent No.6, then the revenue authorities will be bound by such a declaration. Pending I.As., if any, stand disposed of accordingly. Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE JT/- CT: JL