KARNATAKA LAND REVENUE ACT, 1964, Section 107Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, 1966, Rules 50, 51, 52 and 53 - Petitioner sought survey of land in view of dispute relating to extent of land - Tahsildar issued endorsement that survey cannot be conducted in view of pendency of suit in Court Aggrieved petitioner filed writ petition seeking mandamus to direct surveyor to survey land - Survey authorities contended that survey could not be conducted due to non-eo-operation of villagers and also pendency of law suit Held - Suit to which reference is made has nothing to do with surveyor in carrying out his legal obligation - Not taken any steps to carry out survey - Surveyor directed to carry out survey - Directed to issue notice to all parties -If any dispute arises, procedure contemplated in law shall be followed.

A.S. Bopanna, J., Held: A perusal of suit plaint would indicate that the petitioner is not a party to the said suit. The suit in question is an inter se partition suit between the family members. . . . . . The suit to which reference has been made in the endorsement impugned in the petition has nothing to do with the surveyor in carrying out his legal obligation. Therefore to the said extent the impugned endorsement is not sustainable and the same is liable to be quashed, which is accordingly done. . . . . . Having come to the said conclusion and also having noticed the fact that the surveyor has not taken any steps to carry out the survey as contemplated in law, it is necessary to direct to carry out the survey as contemplated under the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 and the Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, 1966. The surveyor is directed to issue notice to all the parties concerned and strictly follow the rules and complete the survey. It is needless to mention that while doing so if there is any dispute, the procedure contemplated in law shall be followed strictly and complete in accordance with law. In order to hasten the process, the petitioner shall me a fresh representation seeking for survey along with a certified copy of this order. The Tahsildar shall issue notice to all the parties concerned and fix the date for carrying out the survey. Thereafter the entire process shall be carried out expeditiously as possible, but not later than a period of four months from the day which is notified by the Tahsildar for appearance of the parties for conducting the survey. (paras 4, 5 and 6)

The Court, made the following:

ORDRR

The petitioner is before this Court assailing the endorsement dated 5-12-2007 issued by the third respondent, which is impugned at Annexure-B to the petition. The petitioner has also sought for mandamus to direct the third respondent to conduct the survey in accordance with law and to prepare the sketch.

2. The petitioner claims to be the owner in possession of the property bearing Survey No. 10/1 measuring 1 acre 32 guntas situate at Kengal Kempohalli Village, Sompura Hobli, Nelamangala Taluk. The petitioner claims that the revenue records also stands in the name of the petitioner. However, while carrying out the mutation order, the revenue authorities had wrongly indicated only 35 guntas of land in block No. 3 and in that context, the dispute has arisen. The fourth respondent herein claims right to certain other extents of the property in the very same Survey No. 10/1. It is in that context, there was a suit for injunction between the petitioner and the fourth respondent herein in O.S. No. 414 of 1995. The suit instituted by the fourth respondent was dismissed and subsequently the regular appeal filed by him is also said to have been dismissed. In view of the dispute relating to the extent of the property, there were several other proceedings between the petitioner and the fourth respondent. In order to settle these aspects of the matter, the petitioner has sought for survey of the land so that the extent owned by the petitioner based on the documents can be properly ascertained and the boundaries could