Sri G K Manjunath v. The Deputy Commissioner

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO. 17745 OF 2026 (KLR-RES)

BETWEEN:

SRI G K MANJUNATH S/O LATE G.M KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS R/A CHIKKASANNE POST, KASABA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT 562 110 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHANKARAPPA., ADVOCATE)

AND:

¶1THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE BHAVAN, BEERASANDRA VILLAGE KUNDANA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562110

¶2THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER DODDABALLAPURA SUB DIVISION DODDABALLAPURA BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-561 203

3. THE THASHILDAR

Digitally signed by JUANITA THEJESWINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

DEVANAHALLI TALUK, DEVANAHALLI, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT -562110

¶4SRI. C SUNIL KUMAR S/O LATE CHANNAPPA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/A SANNAAMANEKERE VILLAGE , KASABA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT 562 110 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. B.P.RADHA., AGA FOR R1 TO R3 SRI. RAGHAVENDRA K., ADVOCATE FOR R4)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING THIS HON'BLE COURT TO BE PLEASED TO STAY THE ANNEXURE-J IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 21-08-2024 IN RA (DH) 341/2023 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT, DODDABALLAPURA SUB-DIVISION, DODDABALLAPURA AND ETC.,

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH

ORAL ORDER Learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for respondent Nos.1 to 3. Respondent No.4 is

represented by the learned counsel Sri. Raghavendra.K, by filing a caveat petition.

¶2In this writ petition, the petitioner is assailing the order dated 21.08.2024 (Annexure-J) passed by the respondent No.2 and the order dated

29.01.2026 (Annexure-M) passed by the respondent No.1.

¶3Heard Sri.Shankarappa, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner; Sri.Raghavendra.K, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.4 and Smt. B.P.Radha, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondent Nos.1 to 3 - State.

¶4Sri. Shankarappa, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, submits that, the petitioner claiming right over the property to an extent of 21 guntas in respect of the land bearing Survey No.129 (129/2), out of total extent of 1 acre 37 guntas of Sanna Amanikere Village, Kasaba Hobli, Devanahalli Taluk, Bengaluru Rural District. Learned counsel further contended that the land in

question was granted in favour of the father of the petitioner on 25.09.2004 and a copy of the grant order and spot mahazar are produced at Annexures-B and C, respectively. It is argued by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner by referring to the order dated

05.07.2019 (Annexure-E), wherein the grant made in favour of the father of the petitioner was nullified by the respondent No.1 as per Annexure-E and thereafter, the petitioner herein has filed an appeal before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal in Appeal No.1075/2019. The said appeal came to be dismissed for non-prosecution on

02.08.2024 (Annexure-G). Thereafter, the petitioner herein has filed Miscellaneous Appeal No.17/2024 before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal at Bengaluru and same is pending consideration. In the meanwhile, the respondent-authorities vide impugned orders at Annexures-J and M, have changed the mutation entries in favour of respondent No.4 in respect of the subject land and the said action on the part of the respondent authorities requires to be

interfered with on the ground that as the matter is pending consideration before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal and accordingly sought for interference of this Court.

¶5Per contra, Sri. Raghavendra.K, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.4 submits that the respondent No.4 had purchased the land to an extent of 1 acre 01 Guntas as per the registered sale deed dated

22.10.2005 and katha has been made based on the registered sale deed. Therefore, sought for dismissal of the writ petition.

¶6Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondent - State has sought to justify the impugned orders.

¶7In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, and on careful consideration of the impugned orders it indicates that the land to an extent of 21 guntas of land in Survey No.129

was granted in favour of the father of the petitioner as per the grant order dated 25.09.2004. The said order of grant was challenged by one Smt. Pankaja.G.S.Murthy and Smt. Nagamani before the competent authority and the respondent No.1 by order dated 05.07.2019 (Annexure-E) allowed the appeal and as such the grant to an extent of 21 guntas of land made in Survey No.129 situated at Sanna amanikere Village, Devanahalli Taluk was quashed.

¶8Feeling aggrieved by the said order at Annexure-E, the petitioner has preferred an appeal before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal in Appeal No.1075/2019 and the said appeal came to be dismissed for non-prosecution on 02.08.2024 (Annexure-G). Immediately, thereafter the petitioner has preferred Miscellaneous Appeal No.17/2024 before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal seeking restoration of the appeal. In the meanwhile, the respondent authorities have changed the katha in respect of the land in question in favour of respondent No.4 as per the registered sale deed dated

22.10.2005. It is to be considered that as per the registered sale deed the claim made by respondent No.4 is only to an extent of 1 acre 01 guntas of land in Survey No.129 and the claim made by the petitioner herein is to an extent of 21 guntas in Survey No.129 as per the grant order dated 25.09.2004.

¶9In that view of the matter, since the matter is yet to be concluded by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal as to the veracity of the grant made in favour of the father of the petitioner herein, I am of the opinion that no interference is called for in this petition. However, taking into consideration of the fact that the matter is pending consideration before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, after the conclusion of the aforementioned proceedings, in the event if the petitioner succeeds before the Kanataka Appellate Tribunal, it is open for the petitioner to approach the competent authority for restoration of the revenue entries in the name of the petitioner, to an extent of 21

guntas only, being a legal heir of the original grantee - Sri. G.M.Krishnappa.

With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of.

Sd/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE

KLY List No.: 1 Sl No.: 30