Sri. K N Venugopal v. Sri. Nagaraj

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.SHANTHI BHUSHAN CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 41 OF 2024 BETWEEN:

¶1SRI. K N VENUGOPAL S/O RAMASWAMY MUDILIYAR K AGED ABOUT 79 YEARS OCC: AGRICULTURE

¶2SRI BYRAPPA S/O DODDA BACHAPPA AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS OCC; AGRICULTURE

BOTH ARE R/O YELLAKUNTE VILLAGE BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK, BEGUR HOBLI BANGALORE DISTRICT. …COMPLAINANTS (BY SRI. PRAVEEN KUMAR RAIKOTE, ADVOCATE)

AND:

¶1SRI. NAGARAJ THE TAHSILDAR BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK BANGALORE DISTRICT-560009. ...ACCUSED

Digitally signed by MALA K N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶2THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE M S BUILDING, BANGALORE-560 001. …PRO-FORMA RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. B. RAVINDRANATH, AGA FOR PROFORMA R2)

THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 215 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, PRAYING TO PUNISH THE ACCUSED FOR HAVING DELIBERATELY VIOLATED THE DIRECTIONS OF LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE PASSED IN WP NO.5944/21 DATED 31.05.2023.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.SHANTHI BHUSHAN ORAL ORDER

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH)

The present contempt petition has been filed alleging willful disobedience and non-compliance of the order dated

31.05.2023 passed by Writ Court in W.P.No.5944/2021 (KLR-RES).

¶2The order dated 31.05.2023 reads thus: "The case of the petitioners is that they were granted occupancy rights in respect of 4 acres 19 guntas of land in Survey No.18/1 of Yellakunte village, Bengaluru South Taluk. However, their names were not entered into in the revenue records pertaining to the said lands. Further, an enquiry was also initiated in respect of lands granted by respondent no.1/Assistant Commissioner. Hence, they have preferred the instant writ petition to quash the proceedings before the Assistant Commissioner and also direct the Tahsildar to mutate their names in the revenue records. It is also noticed that by way of an earlier order in W.P.No.8612/2020, this Court had directed the jurisdictional Tahsildar to consider the case of the petitioners.

¶2In the course of the arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that proceedings before Assistant Commissioner has terminated in favour of the petitioners herein and respondent no.1 has also issued a direction to respondent no.2/Tahsildar to comply with the orders of this Court in W.P.No.8612/2020.

¶3The learned HCGP appearing for respondent nos.1 and 2 does not dispute the above mentioned facts.

¶4For aforementioned reasons, respondent no.2/ Tahsildar is directed to comply with orders of this Court in

W.P.No.8612/2020 within a period of six weeks from today.

The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly."

¶3In compliance of the contempt notice issued, respondents/contemnors have filed their affidavit dated

20.08.2026. Paragraphs-4, 5 and 6 read as under: "4. I submit that on verification of the Mutation Records maintained in my office, I noticed that the Land Tribunal, Bangalore South Taluk, had granted occupancy rights vide its order dated 26-6-1982 in respect of land in Sy. No. 18/1 measuring 4 Acres 19 guntas, situate at Yellukunte Village, Begur Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk in favour of the Complainants herein i.e., 1-00 Acre in favour of Sri. K.R. Venugopal and 3 Acres 19 guntas in favour of Sri. Byrappa and in pursuance of the same, Form No. 10 had been issued in their favour on 12-5-1982.

¶5Further, Sri. Rajanna and Govindappa have filed an Appeal under Sec. 136(2) Karnataka Land Revenue Act, against S.P. Annaiahappa S/o Pillareddy and others, before the Assistant Commissioner, Bangalore South Sub-division, challenging the Mutation Entries made in M.R.No.13/80-81, 22/2004-05 and M.R. H1/2015-16 in respect of land in question i.e., Sy.No. 18/1 against the said S.P.Aaaiahppa and others, on the ground that the Land Tribunal had granted the land in question in their favour. In

the said proceedings, the herein got themselves impleaded as Complainants Respondents 7 & 8 and opposed the said Appeal by stating that the Appellants therein by creating fake documents got the mutation in their favour. After hearing, the Asst. Commissioner while vacating the stay granted, directed the Tahsildar to take necessary steps in accordance with the order of this Hon'ble Court in W.P.No.8612/2020 dt. 17-7-2020.

¶6I further submit that out of 4 Acres 19 guntas in the land in question i.e., Sy. 18/1, an extent of 0-17.08 Guntas of land, had been converted from agricultural to non-agriculture as per Conversion Order bearing No. ALN/SR/5307/2003-04 dated 5-12-2003 issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore District and hence, the same is now within the limits of the B.B.M.P. When once the portion land in question is ceased to be an Agricultural land and the same comes within the jurisdiction of the BBMP, the Tahsildar will not have any jurisdiction over the same and thus he had no power or jurisdiction, in law i.e., under the provisions of Karnataka Land Revenue Act, to mutate the land in favour of the Complainants."

¶4In light of the above, we are of the view that no agriculture takes place at Yelahanka, as it is a fully developed area where malls, apartments and residential complexes have come up. We, therefore, find no ground to

proceed with the contempt proceedings. Accordingly, the contempt proceedings are closed. The contempt notice stands discharged.

Sd/- (D K SINGH) JUDGE

Sd/- (H.SHANTHI BHUSHAN) JUDGE

KNM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5