##PAGE1##

- 1 -

NC: 2026:KHC-D:1460

WP No. 102465 of 2025

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD

DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA

WRIT PETITION NO. 102465 OF 2025 (KLR-RR/SUR)

BETWEEN:

PUTTAPPA S/O. DYAMAPPA NARTI

AGE: 65 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,

R/O. SHIGGAON, TQ: SHIGGAON,

DIST: HAVERI-581110.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. D.M.MALLI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. MANTESH S/O. NINGAPPA MALLADAD

AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,

R/O. SHIGGAON, TQ: SHIGGAON,

DIST: HAVERI-581205/581110.

2. BASAVARAJ S/O. NINGAPPA MALLADAD

Digitaly

signed by

MANJANNA E

Location: AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,

HIGH COURT

M EANJANNAO K DA HF R AN RA WT AA DKA

B DE atN eC :H R/O. SHIGGAON, TQ: SHIGGAON,

2026.02.11

14:40:01

+0530

DIST: HAVERI-581205/581110.

3. MAHESH S/O. NINGAPPA MALLADAD

AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,

R/O. SHIGGAON, TQ: SHIGGAON,

DIST: HAVERI-581205/581110.

4. MALLAMMA @ MALLAVVA

W/O. NINGAPNA MALLADAD,

AGE: 65 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE,

- 2 -

NC: 2026:KHC-D:1460

WP No. 102465 of 2025

HC-KAR

R/O. SHIGGAON, TQ: SHIGGAON,

DIST: HAVERI-581205/581110.

5. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER SAVANUR

SUB-DIVISION SAVANUR,

TQ: SHIGGAON,

DIST: HAVERI-581110.

6. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HAVERI

TQ: HAVERI,

DIST: HAVERI-581110.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT. NANDINI B.SOMAPUR, AGA FOR R5 AND R6)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND

227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A

WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI, QUASHING THE

IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.6-DEPUTY

COMMISSIONER, HAVERI, IN RTS RA CR BEARING NO.25/2023-

24 DATED 05.06.2024 VIDE ANNEXURE-A, AND ALLOW THE

APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BY SETTING ASIDE ORDER

PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.5/ASSISTANT COMMISIONER

SAVANUR IN RTS AP:SR-16/2009-10 DATED 03.07.2023, VIDE

ANNEXURE-G AND ETC.

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY

HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA

- 3 -

NC: 2026:KHC-D:1460

WP No. 102465 of 2025

HC-KAR

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner has called in question the order dated

05.06.2024 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Haveri, in RTS

RA CR bearing No.25/2023-24, whereby the revision preferred

by the petitioner came to be dismissed, confirming the order

dated 03.07.2023 passed by the Assistant Commissioner,

Savanur, relating to the Mutation Entry No.157/2008-09 in

respect of the land bearing RS Nos.224/3A and 224/3B of

Shiggaon Taluk.

2. Brief facts

The dispute pertains to a Mutation Entry No.157/2008-09

standing in the names of respondent Nos.1 to 3. The said

mutation is based on a registered sale deed executed in their

favour. The petitioner claims possession and asserts that the sale

deed and the GPA relied upon by respondent Nos.1 to 3 are

bogus and do not confer any right.

3. Earlier, the Assistant Commissioner had set aside the

mutation entry. However, upon remand by the Deputy

Commissioner, the Assistant Commissioner after reconsideration,

confirmed the mutation entry by order dated 03.07.2023. The

- 4 -

NC: 2026:KHC-D:1460

WP No. 102465 of 2025

HC-KAR

revision petition filed by the petitioner against the said order was

dismissed by the Deputy Commissioner on 05.06.2024.

Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has approached this Court

in this writ petition.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

mutation entry in favour of respondent Nos.1 to 3 is based on a

bogus sale deed and a GPA, which do not relate to the survey

numbers in question. It is submitted that the authorities have

failed to consider the compromise decree passed in RA

No.178/2017, wherein the parties have settled the dispute. It is

contended that the revenue authorities have exceeded their

jurisdiction by recognizing rights of respondent Nos.1 to 3,

despite the serious dispute raised by the petitioner regarding the

title. It is contended that the impugned orders are arbitrary and

liable to be quashed.

5. Learned Additional Government Advocate for

respondents-State submits that the revenue authorities are

justified in maintaining the mutation pursuant to a registered