SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 441542

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
SMT. M SADAMMA ALIAS B SUDHA W/O MARUTHI – Appellant
Versus
K MABU SAB S/O LATE GUDU SAB – Respondent
WP 109728/2025



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD

DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

WRIT PETITION NO.109728 OF 2025 (KLR-CON)

BETWEEN:

SMT. M. SADAMMA @ B. SUDHA W/O MARUTHI,

AGE: 41 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,

R/O. WARD NO. 17, NEAR NATARAJ KALA MANDIR,

TQ: KAMPLI, DIST: BELLARY-583132.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. SHIVRAJ S. BALLOLI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. K. MABU SAB S/O. LATE GUDU SAB,

AGE: 67 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,

R/O. WARD NO.6, 2ND CROSS,

VINAYAKA NAGAR, TQ: KAMPLI,

Digitally signed by DIST: BELLARY-583132.

CHANDRASHEKAR

LAXMAN

KATTIMANI

Location: HIGH

C KA O R U N R A T T O A F KA

2. ABDUL KARIM SAB S/O. LATE GUDU SAB,

DHARWAD BENCH

AGE: 65 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,

R/O. WARD NO.6, 2ND CROSS,

VINAYAKA NAGAR, TQ: KAMPLI,

DIST: BELLARY-583132.

3. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,

VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001.

(REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY)

4. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,

BELLARY DISTRICT, STATION ROAD,

BSNL COLONY, COWL BAZAAR, TQ: AND DIST: BELLARI-583101.

5. THE TAHASILDAR, TALUKA OFFICE KAMPLI, TQ: KAMPLI, DIST: BELLARI-583132.

6. THE CHIEF OFFICER, TOWN MUNICIPALITY, TQ: KAMPLI, DIST: BELLARI-583132.

7. SMT. RATNAGIRI ERAMMA W/O. LATE ERAPPA, AGE: 81 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O. VEERATHPETH, WARD NO.17, TQ: KAMPLI, DIST: BELLARI-583132.

8. RATNAGIRI MELAGIRIYAPPA S/O. LATE MUDDANNA, AGE: 54 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. VEERATHPETH, WARD NO.17, TQ: KAMPLI, DIST: BELLARI-583132.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PARASHURAM R. HATTARAKIHAL, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2;

SRI. PRAVEEN K. UPPAR, AGA FOR R3-R5; NOTICE TO R6 & R8 IS DISPENSED WITH)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND

227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 03.12.2025 PASSED BY THE LEARNED KARNATAKA APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU ON I.A. NO.VI IN REV. APPEAL NO.37/2025 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND CONSEQUENTLY; SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 24.02.2025 PASSED BY THE LEARNED KARNATAKA APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU ON I.A. NO.II IN REV. APPEAL NO.37/2025 VIDE ANNEXURE-S AND ETC.

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

ORAL ORDER

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE)

1. The petition is filed assailing the order dated

03.12.2025 passed by learned Karnataka Appellate Tribunal (for short ‘Tribunal’) on I.A.No.VI in Rev.Appeal No.37/2025, marked at Annexure-A.

2. In terms of the said order, the Tribunal has dismissed I.A.No.VI filed by the present petitioner, who prayed to vacate the stay order granted on 24.02.2025.

3. Certain facts borne out from the records are as under;

3.1 The property bearing Survey No.1395 measuring 11 Acres 76 Cents was the subject matter of sale in favour of respondents No.1 and 2.

3.2 Respondents No.1 and 2 were minors when the property was purchased in their name by their father. Survey No.1401 measuring 7 Acres 27 Cents was the subject matter of a gift deed executed by donee-the grandmother. It is claimed that donee is acquired right over aforementioned 7 Acres 27 Cents of land under the registered gift deed dated 10.04.1961. The aforementioned properties were subject matter of exchange under the registered exchange deed dated

11.04.1962.

3.3 The petitioner claims that in view of the exchange deed dated 11.04.1962, the petitioner’s predecessor acquired right over property bearing Survey No.1395 measuring 11 Acres 76 Cents; and respondents No.1 and 2 acquired ownership over property bearing Survey No.1401 measuring 7 Acres

27 Cents referred to above.

3.4 It is stated that respondents No.1 and 2 after attaining majority, have sold portion of the property in Survey No.1401 measuring 7 Acre

27 Cents under the registered sale deed dated 15.09.1983.

3.5 It is further stated that after 2017, five sale deeds have been executed in respect of the property bearing Sy.No.1401.

4. Learned counsel for respondents No.1 and 2 would submit that five sale deeds were not executed, only three sale deeds were executed.

5. It is stated that respondent No.1 filed O.S.No.20 of

2017, on t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top