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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 9738

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
SMT. HOMBALAMMA – Appellant
Versus
THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND THE APPALLENT AUTHORITY – Respondent
WP 26364/2025



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 26364 OF 2025 (LB-RES)

BETWEEN

1. SMT. HOMBALAMMA W/O LATE BASAVEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS, 2. SRI. APPAJI, S/O LATE BASAVEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, BOTH ARE RESIDING AT KODAGAHALLI VILLAGE, MUTHEGERE POST, BASARALU HOBLI, MANDYA TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT - 571416.

... PETITIONER (BY SRI. K.N. NITHISH., ADVOCATE)

AND Digitally signed by VARSHA N

1. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND RASALKAR Location: HIGH THE APPALLENT AUTHORITY COURT OF KARNATAKA ZILLA PANCHAYATH, MANDYA, MANDYA DISTRICT- 571401. 2. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND COMPETENT AUTHORITY, TALUK PANCHAYATH, MANDYA, MANDYA TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT - 571401.

3. THE PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, BASARALU GRAMA PANCHAYATH, BASARALU, MANDYA TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT - 571416.

4. SRI. K.C. SHIVARAMU, S/O LATE CHIKKE GOWDA, KODAGAHALLI, MANDYA TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT - 571416.

5. THE TAHSILDAR MANDYA TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT.

6. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS MANDYA TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT.

…. RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.S. DEVARAJU., ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3;

SRI. A. NAGARAJAPPA.,ADVOCATE FOR R4;

SRI. BOPPANNA BELLIYAPPA., AGA FOR R5 & R6 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER, OR DIRECTION, QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 13.02.2025 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.2 IN APPEAL NO.19/2024-

25 AT ANNEXURE K AND ETC.

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS AND HAVING BEEN RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 28.01.2026, THIS DAY, THE COURT PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING:

CAV ORDER

1. The Petitioners are before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:

“A. Issue a writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction, quashing the impugned order dated 13.02.2025 passed by respondent no.2 in Appeal no.19/2024-

25 at Annexure K, B. Issue a writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction, quashing the impugned order dated 30.07.2025 passed by respondent no.1 in Appeal No. MDYZP-

DEV00THS:1/2025 at Annexure P C. Issue a writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction, quashing the impugned Notice dated 21.08.2025 issued by respondent no.3 bearing No. GRA PUM//2025-2026 at Annexure S D. Grant such other further reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity.”

2. Petitioner No.1 claims to be the absolute owner of a house property situated at Kodagahalli Village, BasaraluHobli, Mandya Taluk and District, in respect of which an E-Khatha bearing No.152100404801220007 has been issued by the competent authority. According to the petitioner, the said property is ancestral in nature, and the family of the petitioner has been in continuous possession and enjoyment of the property for more than eighty years. It is contended that the revenue records as well as the municipal records recognise the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner’s family over the said property.

3. Petitioner No.2 similarly claims to be the absolute owner of property bearing Site No.6/6, situated at Kodagahalli Village, BasaraluHobli, Mandya Taluk and District. It is contended that the said property is also ancestral property, originally belonging to the grandfather of petitioner No.2, namely Patel Javaregowda, S/o Patel Kalegowda. According to petitioner No.2, upon the demise of his father and grandfather, he has succeeded to the property by way of inheritance and has been in lawful possession and enjoyment of the same.

4. The petitioners contend that they are the absolute owners in possession and enjoyment of their respective properties. It is alleged that respondent No.4, who according to the petitioners has no right, title or interest in the said properties, has been interfering with their peaceful possession and enjoyment. In that b

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