The mutation of names in land revenue records should be based on prima facie material, and disputes over the validity of documents should be addressed in the Civil Court.

K. Sreedhar Rao, J.--This Writ Petition projects an interesting question of law relating to jurisdiction of the land revenue authorities regarding the scope of enquiry under Section 129 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act (hereinafter called in short as Act) in respect of the lands bearing Sy. No. 69/11 of Srimangala village measuring 2 acres of Virajpet Taluk in Kodagu District. One P.K. Kumaran was the owner and khatedar. The writ Petitioner claims to be the son of P.K. Kumaran. Respondents No. 2 and 3 are the sister and brother of the Petitioner, and children of P.K. Kumaran. After the demise of Kumaran on 29.12.1995, respondent No. 2 on the strength of the registered Will executed by late P.K. Kumaran requested mutate of names in the land revenue records. The Petitioner seriously contested the application of respondent No. 2 contends that the Will is invalid and unenforceable.

2. The names of respondent No. 2 was mutated by virtue of the registered Will. The Petitioner filed appeal before the Assistant Commissioner challenging the mutation by an order at Annexure-B. Mutation was cancelled by the Assistant Commissioner. The respondents preferred revision over the said order before the Deputy Commissioner who in revision by an order at Annexure-A set aside the order of the Assistant Commissioner and directed to mutate names of respondent No. 2 as khatedar on the basis of the registered Will. It appears that under the Will the deceased P.K. Kumaran has bequeathed all his disputed properties in favour of respondent No. 2. Third respondent sails with the Petitioner.

3. It is the contention of the Petitioner in this petition that on the basis of the disputed Will no mutation entries could have been effected in favour of the 2nd respondent, and relied on the ruling of this Court in Lakshmi v. Assistant Commissioner and Ors. reported in ILR 1999 Kar 169, in the said decision it is held thus:

Combined effect of Section 63 and Section 68 is when to have an effective disposition under a Will whether registered or unregistered. Two sections must be complied with, otherwise no right can flow under the Will. Proof of the Will is to be made either in Court of law or any procedure known to law provided under registration Act. Without such proof being tendered or made available in the eye of law, it cannot be construed to be an instrument under which a right is acquired within the meaning of Section 128 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act which contemplates acquisition of right by succession, survivorship, partition, purchase, mortgage, gift, lease or otherwise. The Will has to come within the column or otherwise and further they should be proved as per law. Of course, the only exception that can be made is if all the parties consent and accept the Will, then acquisition may be held, flow out of the Will. For that purpose Section 128 is made clear. Till Will is proved in a manner known to law no mutation entry can be effected.

In view of the said ruling, it is strenuously contended that the Will being disputed, the authorities had no other way except to direct the 2nd respondent to prove the Will before the competent Court of law otherwise all the legal heirs should have been mutated as per the request of the Petitioner.

To understand the scope and jurisdiction of the enquiry under Section 129 of the Land Revenue Act, it is necessary to advert to the provisions of Section 128 of the Act which reads thus:

128. Acquisition of rights to be reported.-(1) Any person acquiring by succession, survivorship, inheritance, partition, purchase, mortgage, gift, lease or otherwise, any right as holder, occupant, owner, mortgagee, landlord or tenant of the land or assignee of the rent or revenue thereof, shall report orally or in writing his acquisition of such right to the prescribed officer of the village within three months from the date of such acquisition, and the said officer shall at once give written acknowledgement of the receipt of the report to th