IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K WRIT APPEAL NO. 807 OF 2025 (KLR-RES)

BETWEEN:

1. SMT G MAHALAKSHMI W/O. LATE KRISHNASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, R/O. KODAVATHI VILLAGE, YEDIYUR HOBLI, KUNIGAL TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572111.

…APPELLANT (BY SRI. THIMMAIAH K H., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE REVENUE SECRETARY Digitally GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, signed by M.S. BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD, VASANTHA KUMARY B K BANGALORE 560 001.

Location:

HIGH COURT OF 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, KARNATAKA TUMKUR DISTRICT, TUMKUR 572 101. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, TUMKUR SUB-DIVISION, TUMKUR 572 101.

4. THE TAHSILDAR, KUNIGAL TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572 142.

5. THE REVENUE INSPECTOR, YADIYUR, YADIYUR HOBLI, KUNIGAL TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572 142.

6. SRI. VEERANNA, S/O. LATE KEMPAIAH, MAJOR IN AGE, 7. SRI LAKSHMAIAH S/O LATE KEMPAIAH, MAJOR IN AGE, 8. SRI THAMMAIAH S/O LATE KEMPAIAH, MAJOR IN AGE, 9. SRI SIDDALINGAIAH S/O LATE KEMPAIAH, MAJOR IN AGE, 10. SRI SRINIVAS S/O LATE KEMPAIAH, MAJOR IN AGE, R-6 TO R-10 ARE RESIDING AT KODAVATHI VILLAGE, YEDIYUR HOBLI, KUNIGAL TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT-572111.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SUDEV HEGDE, AGA FOR R-1 TO R-5)

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 11.03.2025 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WP No. 1312/2025 (KLR-RES) BY ALLOWING THE WRIT APPEAL CONSEQUENTLY SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT No. 2 AND 3, ETC.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K)

This intra court appeal is filed by the appellant being aggrieved by the impugned judgment and order dated 11.03.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.1312/2025, whereby the writ petition filed by the petitioner was dismissed with an observation that the petitioner has to establish his title over the property in question before the competent Civil Court.

2. The grievance of the petitioner is that he had approached the Assistant Commissioner so also the Deputy Commissioner, Tumkur District, seeking to delete the name of respondent Nos.1 to 5 in Column No.9 of RTC extract based on M.R.No.3 of 1995-1996 and M.R.No.4 of 1995-1996 on the basis of partition deed and sale deed respectively.

3. However, both the Assistant Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner, Tumkur, have rejected the claim of the petitioner for the reason that the entries are made on the basis of a registered sale deed. Against which the petitioner approached the learned Single Judge. While disposing the writ petition the learned Single Judge has observed that since the revenue entries are effected based on a sale deed and though the petitioner claims right over the suit property, title has to be established by the competent Civil Court. Further, the learned Single Judge while dismissing the writ petition granted liberty to the petitioner to approach the Civil Court to establish his title.

4. In view of the aforesaid, we find no error in the order passed by the learned Single Judge, which calls for interference. Since the appeal lacks merit, the same stands dismissed.

Sd/-

(D K SINGH)

JUDGE Sd/-

(RAJESH RAI K)

JUDGE NG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12