Karnataka High Court
WA/1454/2025 of SRI SIDDAGANGAIAH Vs SRI. G. KEMPAIAH on 23 April 2026
NC: 2026:KHC:22368-DB WA No. 1454 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF APRIL, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF WRIT APPEAL NO. 1454 OF 2025 (KLR-RR/SUR) BETWEEN: 1. SRI SIDDAGANGAIAH SINCE DEAD BY
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF APRIL, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF
WRIT APPEAL NO. 1454 OF 2025 (KLR-RR/SUR)
BETWEEN:
1.
SRI SIDDAGANGAIAH
SINCE DEAD BY LRS
SMT. MUNIYAMMA,
AGED ABOUT 83 YEARS,
W/O LATE SIDDAGANGAIAH,
2.
SRI. BASAVARAJU,
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,
S/O LATE SIDDAGANGAIAH,
3.
SRI. REVANASIDDAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS,
S/O LATE SIDDAGANGAIAH,
4.
SRI. SOMASHEKARAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,
S/O LATE SIDDAGANGAIAH,
5.
SRI. GANGADAR,
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
S/O LATE SIDDAGANGAIAH,
APPELLANTS 1 TO 5 ALL R/AT:
LAKKUR TOTA, LAKKUR GARDEN,
Digitally
signed by
REKHA R
Location:
High Court
of Karnataka
HC-KAR
6.
SMT. RAJAMMA,
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
W/O SRI. SHIVANNA,
TIPPUR VILLAGE,
GUBBI TALUK,
TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572 216.
7.
SMT. GANGAMMA,
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
W/O SRI. T.V. GOVINDARAJU,
NO.214, GUDIPALYA,
TUMKUR TALUK,
TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572 101.
…APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. VIVEK B.N. ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. A. ABHINAV RAMANAND., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
SRI. G. KEMPAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS,
S/O SRI. GANGANNA,
2.
SRI. GURUSIDDAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS,
S/O SRI. GANGANNA
BOTH ARE R/AT:
LAKKUR GARDEN,
3.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
M.S. BUILDING,
DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
REPRESENTED BY
ITS SECRETARY
HC-KAR
4.
THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
5.
The ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
DODDABALLAPURA SUB-DIVISION,
DODDABALLAPURA,
BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 561 203.
6.
THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR,
NADA KACHERI,
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SRI. MOHAMMED JAFFAR SHAH,
AGA FOR R1 TO R4)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO CALL FOR
RECORDS IN WP NO.1264/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED
SINGLE
JUDGE
AND
SET
ASIDE
THE
FINAL
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
DATED:24.04.2025 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WP NO.1264/2017 AND CONSEQUENTLY, REJECT THE WRIT PETITION FILED BY RESPONDENT NOS.1 AND
- PETITIONERS IN WP NO.1264/2017(KLR-RR/SUR) AND ETC.
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 T.M.NADAF
HC-KAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH)
The present intra Court appeal has been filed impugning the judgment and order dated 24.04.2025 passed by the Writ Court in WP.No.1264/2017.
2. The appellant has filed an application for mutating their names with respect to the land bearing Sy.No.100/1 of Lakkur Village, Sompura Hobli, Nelamangala Taluk, Bangalore Rural District. The application was filed in the year 2009. Thus, from 1944 till 2009, the appellant/respondent No.5 did not take any step to get his name mutated in respect of the said land on the basis of the registered sale deed dated 17.01.1944. Whereas the petitioners name was found in the RTCs from 1968-1969 till date. Despite this enormous delay by the appellant/respondent No.5, the Deputy Commissioner has directed the mutation of the name of the appellant/respondent No.5 in the revenue record in respect to the said land on the ground that the appellant/respondent No.5 or his predecessor in interest had purchased the property vide sale deed dated 17.01.1944.
HC-KAR
3. It may be taken note of the fact that the appellant/respondent No.5 has already filed an original suit in OS.No.58/2009 for a declaration of title in his favour. The learned Single Judge has therefore allowed the Writ Petition in terms of paragraph Nos.6 and 7 of the impugned judgment, which reads as are follows: "6. It is to be noticed here that the khatha in the instant case stood in the name of Ganganna right from 1968-69 till his death and therefore, there was no justification for the Deputy Commissioner to interfere with the mutation in which the names of legal heirs of deceased khatedar were brought on record.
7. In that view of the matter, the order of the Deputy Commissioner is set aside and the order of the Deputy Tahsildar and the Assistant Commissioner shall stand restored. It is also clarified that the entries in favour of the petitioners would always be subject to the result of the suit in O.S.No.58/2009 and the revenue entries would abide by the decree to be passed in the suit."
4. When the appellant/respondent No.5's name did not find a place in the revenue record with respect to the land from 1944 till 2009, and he only made an effort in the year 2009 to get his name mutated on the basis of the sale deed dated 17.01.1944, the learned Single judge was right in saying that the appellant/respondent No.5, name cannot be mutated. The
HC-KAR
appellant/respondent No.5, name would not be mutated till the original suit No.58/2009 gets decided and decree is passed in favour of the appellant.
5. The learned Single Judge has made it clear that the revenue entries in the names of petitioners Kempaiah and Gurusiddaiah, would be subject to the final outcome of OS.No.58/2009.
We find not reason to interfere with the impugned order and the writ petition stands dismissed.
In view of the dismissal of the petition, pending I.A's, if any, does not survive for consideration and the same is disposed of.
Sd/- (D K SINGH) JUDGE
Sd/- (T.M.NADAF) JUDGE
PK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1 ct-vn