- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7652 WP No. 22426 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO.22426 OF 2023 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: NAGARAJU M. R. S/O. LATE REVANNA @ REVAIAH AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS RESIDING AT MATHAHALLI MATHAHALLI POST DASANAPURA HOBLI BENGALURU-562 162 …PETITIONER (BY SRI ALLAH BAKASH M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT AMBEDKAR VEDHI, VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU-560 001 2. EXECUTIVE OFFICER TALUK PANCHAYATH BENGALURU NORTH TALUK NO.3, HXV+562 NES OFFICER ROAD SONGAPPA LAYOUT EAST COLONY, YELAHANKA BENGALURU-560 064 3. PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER HUSKUR GRAMA PANCHAYATH DASANAPURA HOBLI BENGALURU-562 162 Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7652 WP No. 22426 of 2023 4. SMT. SOUMYA W/O. RAVIKUMAR AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS RESIDING AT MATTAHALLI VILLAGE MATTAHALLI POST, DASANAPURA HOBLI BENGALURU NORTH TALUK BENGALURU-562 162 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI BOPPANNA BELLIYAPPA, A.G.A. FOR R-1; SRI M. S. DEVARAJU, ADVOCATE FOR R-2 AND R-3; SRI JAYAPRAKASH SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R-4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 16.05.2023, IN CASE NO.B.N.T.P/V.P (A) 4/2019-20, PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2, VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION IS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs; a. Quashing the impugned order dated: 16.05.2023, in case NO.B.N.T.P/V.P (A) 4/2019-20, passed by the respondent no.2, Vide Annexure-A. b. Issue mandamus or direction directing the respondent no.2-3 to make Khata entry in favour of petitioner in respect of the schedule property. c. Such other reliefs that this Hon’ble court deems fit, in the interest of justice and equity. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7652 WP No. 22426 of 2023 2. The petitioner claims to have acquired title for the property bearing Kaneshkumari No.50/50, 51/51, 53/53, 55/55 under a gift deed 17.09.2012 executed by the petitioners’ father. Despite the gift the property continued to stand in the name of the father of the petitioner. After the expiry of the father of the petitioner, the petitioner filed an appeal in Case No.B.N.T.P/V.P (A) 4/2019-20 on 03.08.2019 for change of Katha and incorporation of his name, notice having been issued to respondent No.4, respondent No.4 had contended that there was a unregistered Panchayat Pallu Patti, despite which respondent No.2 allowed the appeal and directed the transfer of Katha in the name of the petitioner. 3. Subsequently, a Review Petition having been filed by respondent No.4, the said Review Petition was allowed on 16.05.2023 the order in favour of petitioner was recalled and name of respondent No.4 directed to be entered in the revenue records. It is - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7652 WP No. 22426 of 2023 challenging the same, that the petitioner is before this Court seeking for the aforesaid reliefs. 4. It is not in dispute that the property belonged to father of the petitioner and respondent No.4. A perusal of the papers indicates that the revenue records stood in the name of the father of the petitioner. The petitioner had filed an appeal under Section 269 of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj Act 1993, where there was a dispute raised by respondent No.4 that there was a Panchayath Pallu Patti/partition in favour of respondent No.4. 5. Despite there being an issue as regards the title of the property, respondent No.2 had allowed the appeal filed by the petitioner and directed the entry of the name of the petitioner. 6. Subsequently, on a Review Petition being filed, respondent No.2 accepted the Review Application and directed the name of respondent No.4 to be entered in the revenue records. I am of the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7652 WP No. 22426 of 2023 considered opinion that both these orders could not have been passed by respondent No.2, which amounts to deciding the title of the property. When there is adverse title set up by rival claimants it is required for the Executive Officer of the Taluk Panchayat to direct the parties to approach the jurisdiction of Civil Court and seek appropriate relief instead of deciding the matter by himself. 7. In that view of the matter, I pass the following; ORDER i. The writ petition is party-allowed. ii. The order dated 16.05.2023 in case No.B.N.T.P/V.P (A) 4/2019-20 passed by respondent No.2 at Annexure-A is set aside. iii. Respondent No.2 is directed to cause the entry of the name of the father of the petitioner viz., Sri.Revanna @ Revaiah in revenue records pertaining to be aforesaid properties. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7652 WP No. 22426 of 2023 iv. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner and respondent No.4 to approach the appropriate Courts and seeking for appropriate reliefs to establish their respective title over the property and thereafter approach respondent No.1. SD/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE SR List No.: 2 Sl No.: 32