IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 33354 OF 2025 (LB-BMP)

BETWEEN:

MR. ASLAM ZACKRIA SAIT S/O LATE MR. HASIM SAIT AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 6/4, 3RD FLOOR, MARTELLO BOULEVARD, M.G.ROAD, MUSEUM ROAD, BENGALURU - 560001 (SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFITS NOT CLAIMED)

…PETITIONER (BY SMT. SUMAN K S, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE ASSISTANT REVENUE OFFICER SHANTHALANAGAR SUB-DIVISION, BBMP PRESENTLY WITHIN THE LIMITS OF GBA, BENGALURU CENTRAL 12TH Digitally FLOOR, signed by PUBLIC UTILITY BUILDING SUMA Location: M.G.ROAD, BENGALURU - 560001.

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

2. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER BBMP EAST ZONE PRESENTLY WITHIN THE LIMITS OFF GBA, BENGALURU CENTRAL PUBLIC UTILITY BUILDING M.G.ROAD, BENGALURU - 560001.

3. THE BBMP COMMISSIONER PRESENTLY WITH THE LIMITS OFF GBA, BENGALURU CENTRAL HUDSON CIRCLE, BENGALURU - 560002.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.PAWAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO 3)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT TO THE R1 TO CONSIDER THE ONLINE DIGITAL E-KHATHA TRANSFER APPLICATION DATED 1ST SEPTEMBER 2025 (ANNX-A) FILED BY THE PETITIONER AND ISSUE THE E-KHATHA CERTIFICATE STANDING IN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER WITH RESPECT TO THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY WITHIN A TIME FRAME TO BE FIXED BY THIS HONORABLE COURT OR WITHIN FOUR WEEKS FROM THE DATE OF THE FINAL ORDER.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner has sought for a writ in the nature of mandamus to consider his online digital khatha transfer application dated 01.09.2025 and issue the e-khatha certificate in his name with respect to schedule property.

2. (i) The petitioner contends that one Mr.Phylee Minoo Maneckjee was the owner of a property bearing Municipal No.9 measuring 4,439 square feet, situated at Museum Road, Bengaluru – 560 001. He executed a sale deed dated 15.10.2004 in favour of the petitioner conveying 1,815 square feet out of 4,439 square feet. He thereafter executed a Will dated 23.12.2022, bequeathing the remaining portion of the aforesaid property. The name of Mr.Phylee Minoo Maneckjee appeared in the property register maintained by the respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3. The said Mr.Phylee Minoo Maneckjee died on

06.07.2023.

(ii) It appears that petitioner had in the meanwhile obtained a probate of the Will executed by Mr.Phylee Minoo Maneckjee in P & SC No.119/2024. He then approached the respondent No.1 by an application dated 02.05.2025 for issuance of e-khatha. However, the respondent No.1 issued an endorsement dated 03.05.2025 directing the petitioner to produce the death certificate of Mr.Phylee Minoo Maneckjee and his sister and a family tree of Mr.Phylee Minoo Maneckjee duly attested by the Tahsildar.

(iii) Later, the petitioner submitted a representation on

13.05.2025 to transfer the khatha and issue the e-khatha in the name of the petitioner. On 03.06.2025, the respondent No.1 issued an endorsement directing the petitioner to obtain and produce a registered relinquishment deed from the sister of Late.Mr.Phylee Minoo Maneckjee. The petitioner then filed an application online for issuance of digital e-khatha on

01.09.2025. Since the same is not considered, the petitioner is before the Court.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is a beneficiary of a will executed by one Mr.Phylee Minoo Maneckjee, who was the registered khatedar of the property and therefore, the respondents could not have dug into the issue further by calling upon the petitioner to produce the relinquishment deed from the sister of Mr.Phylee Minoo Maneckjee. He contends that the Will executed by Mr.Phylee Minoo Maneckjee is probated and therefore, the lawful execution of the Will is proved and no one has challenged the probate granted. He therefore contends that the respondents cannot sit over the judgment and decre