- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8363-DB WA No. 783 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH WRIT APPEAL NO. 783 OF 2025 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI GAJENDRA S/O LATE JYOTHAMMA W/O LATE JAYARAMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, 2. SRI S J SUDHAKAR S/O LATE JYOTHAMMA W/O LATE JAYARAMAPPA, 3. SRI MURALI S/O LATE JYOTHAMMA W/O JAYARAMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, A1 TO A3 ARE R/AT SONNPPANAHALLI VILLAGE, JALA HOBLI, YELAHANKA TALUK, BENGALURU DISTRICT-560 064. 4. SRI CHANDRASHEKAR S/O LATE LAKSHMAMMA D/O LATE NADIPENNA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/AT NO.33 SINGH COMPLEX, DEVI CIRCLE, VIDHYARANYAPURA, BENGALURU -560 097. 5. SMT IMAVATHY D/O BALAGURUVI REDDY, Digitally signed by VASANTHA KUMARY B K Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8363-DB WA No. 783 of 2025 W/O LINGALA RANGA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, R/AT NO. 97, 2ND PHASE, SRINAGARA, CHIKKA BETTAHALLI, VIDHYARANAPURA, BENGALURU -560 097. 6. SMT PUTTAMMA D/O NANJUNDAPPA W/O H T THAMME GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, R/AT NO. 81, 8TH CROSS, 1ST MAIN, SHARADAMBA NAGAR, JALAHALLI BENGALURU -560 013. ALL ARE REPTD. BY THEIR GPA HOLDER SRI. R.NAGARAJA REDDY, S/O LATE RAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, R/AT No.E-285, SINGANAYAKANAHALLI, YELAHANKA HOBLI, BANGALORE-560064 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. DEVDUTT KAMATH, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. V VISWANATH SETTY., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR AMBEDKAR ROAD, BANGALORE -560 001 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT, KANDYA BHAVAN, K .G ROAD, BANGALORE -560 009. 3. THE TAHSILDAR - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8363-DB WA No. 783 of 2025 YELAHANKA TALUK, YELAHANKA, BANGALORE -560 064. 4. KARNATAKA STATE LAWN TENNIS ASSOCIATION REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, CUBBON PARK, BANGALORE -560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. N.DEVDAS, AAG ALONG WITH SRI. M.N.SUDEV HEGDE, AGA FOR R1 TO R3; SRI. BADRI VISHAL AND SRI VIVEK K.G., ADVOCATE FOR C/R4) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE ENTIRE RECORDS ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE SINGLE JUDGE IN WP No. 5983/2023 AND BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE HON'BLE SINGLE JUDGE IN WP No. 5983/2023, DATED 24.04.2025 BY ALLOWING THE ABOVE WRIT APPEAL, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. 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 MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH) Heard Mr.Devdutt Kamath, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr.V.Viswanath Setty for the appellants, Mr. N. Devdas learned Additional Advocate General and Mr. M.N.Sudev Hegde, learned Additional Government Advocate of behalf of the State Authorities. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8363-DB WA No. 783 of 2025 2. The parties are referred to as per their ranking before the writ Court for the sake of convenience. 3. The writ petition came to be filed by the petitioners challenging the decision of the State Government whereby the State Government decided to lease an extent of 7 acres of land in Survey No.19 of Thimmasandra Village, Jala Hobli,Yelahanka Taluk to the State Lawn Tennis Association for the purpose of establishing world-class tennis stadium for a period of thirty years. 4. The petitioners claim to be the owner in possession of 14 acres of land in Survey No.19 since 1965. On the basis of an application made by them, the Deputy Commissioner vide order dated 11.09.1978 granted this land to the petitioners. On the basis of the aforesaid order, the Tahsildar concerned called upon the petitioners (predecessor in interest) to pay an upset price ranging from Rs.1,500/- to Rs.2,000/- and according to the petitioners after they had paid the upset price as demanded by the Tahsildar, they were issued grant certificate dated 27.07.1979. On the basis of the said grant, the petitioners had approached the revenue authorities for mutating their names in - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8363-DB WA No. 783 of 2025 respect of 14 acres of land in Survey No.19 in the year 2013. However, the revenue authorities have not decided their application and in the meantime, the State Government had granted 7 acres of land in Survey No.19 in favour of the Karnataka State Lawn Tennis Association for establishing a world-class stadium for tennis. 5. The learned Single Judge, vide impugned judgment and order has dismissed the writ petition and observed that the petitioners' case that they were issued grant in 1978 for which grant certificate came to be issued on 27.07.1979 after they had paid upset price does not appear to be creditworthy. The learned Single Judge, has also observed that the petitioners have not paid any taxes for a period of 25 years, and they did not take any steps to get their names mutated after the alleged grant certificate was issued in July-1979. Considering all these facts, the petition has been dismissed vide impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge. 6. Mr. Devdutt Kamath, learned Senior Counsel for the appellants submits that the reports of the Tahsildar dated 04.01.2013, the clarification issued by the Assistant - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8363-DB WA No. 783 of 2025 Commissioner on 22.01.2013 and the Tahsildar's report confirming the grant being genuine in the year 2014-15 would suggest that the grant issued to the petitioners pursuant to which the certificate was issued on 27.07.1979 was a genuine grant. The adverse inference should not have been drawn solely on the basis that the petitioners approaching the revenue authorities in the year 2013 for mutating their names against the 14 acres land in Survey No.19. Furthermore, he submits that no revenue authority has adjudicated upon the matter regarding the genuineness of the grant, and the observation of the learned Single Judge that the claim of the petitioners regarding grant does not appear to be genuine and rejecting the writ petition are unjustified. 7. On the other hand, learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the respondent-authorities has supported the judgment and stated that prima facie grant certificate is not a genuine document. 8. Be that as it may, the validity of the grant has to be decided by the revenue authorities by drawing the proceedings and after hearing the petitioners. No such exercise has been - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8363-DB WA No. 783 of 2025 undertaken before and it is the first time that in the writ petition, the State has come with a plea that the grant is not genuine one. 9. We, therefore, dispose of the writ appeal directing the Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru Urban District, Bengaluru to issue notice to the petitioners regarding their claim in respect of the grant of 1978 for which, allegedly certificate was issued on 27.07.1979, and after hearing the petitioners decide the question of genuineness of the grant. We expect the petitioners to cooperate in the hearing before the Deputy Commissioner. The petitioners are at liberty to raise all contentions and place documents which they would like to rely upon in support of their case. 10. Any observation made by the learned Single Judge in the impugned judgment and order will not come in the way of the Deputy Commissioner to take independent view on the basis of the material and evidence to be produced before him by the petitioners and the revenue authorities. 11. With the aforesaid directions and observations, we dispose of the writ appeal. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8363-DB WA No. 783 of 2025 12. For a period of two months, the parties to maintain status quo. Sd/- (D K SINGH) JUDGE Sd/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE RKA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1