IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU WRIT PETITION NO.19820 OF 2021 (GM-CPC)

BETWEEN:

MR. JANARDHAN VARMA SINCE DECEASED

1. PARVATHI AMMA C. H.

W/O. LATE JANARDHAN VERMA AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS

2. C. H. RADHAKRISHNA BALLAL S/O. LATE JANARDHAN VERMA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS

3. C. H. JAYARAMA BALLAL S/O. LATE JANARDHAN VERMA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS

4. MAHESH KUMAR C. H.

S/O. LATE JANARDHAN VERMA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS PETITIONER NOS.1 TO 4 ARE RESIDING AT VITTAL PALACE, POST VITTAL, BANTWAL TALUK DAKSHINA KANNADA-574 243 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI SACHIN B.S., ADVOCATE)

AND:

MR. M. MOHANDAS NAYAK SINCE DECEASED

1. SUMITHRA W/O. LATE M. MOHANDAS NAYAK MAJOR

2. YASHODA D/O. LATE M. MOHANDAS NAYAK MAJOR

3. HARISH NAYAK S/O. LATE M. MOHANDAS NAYAK MAJOR

4. VATHSALA D/O. LATE SRI M. MOHANDAS NAYAK MAJOR RESPONDENT NOS.1 TO 4 ARE RESIDING AT VITLA, VITLA KASABA VILLAGE, VITLA POST BANTWAL TALUK DAKSHINA KANNADA-574 243 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI RAVISHANKAR SHASTRY G., ADVOCATE FOR R-1 AND R-3)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 07.06.2021 IN O.S.NO.158/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C. VIDE ANNEXURE-A.

THIS WRIT PETITION IS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU

ORAL ORDER

1. This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking to challenge an order dated 07.06.2021 in O.S.No.158/2011 passed by the Principal Civil Judge & JMFC, Bantwal, Dakshina Kannada (hereinafter referred to as the “Impugned Order”).

2. This Court, had after hearing the parties on

07.01.2026, passed the following order:

“1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner/plaintiff under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950, seeking to challenge an order dated 07.06.2021 in O.S.No.158/2011 passed by the Principal Civil Judge & JMFC, Bantwal, Dakshina Kannada (hereinafter referred to as the “Impugned Order”). By the Impugned Order, the learned Trial Court has directed the transfer of O.S.No.158/2011 to the court of the Tahasildar, Bantwal, who is the competent authority under the Karnataka Conferment of Ownership on Mulageni or Volamulageni Tenants Act, 2011 (hereinafter referred to as the “Mulageni Act”).

2. The brief fact are that petitioner/plaintiff had filed a suit for recovery of possession, arrears of rent, mesne profits and other reliefs before the Trial Court. It is the case of the petitioner/plaintiff that he is the co-owner of the suit schedule property and the respondent/defendant is a tenant therein. The Learned Trial Court framed Issues of which an additional issues No.1 and 2 was framed as to whether the suit is maintainable in view of the Mulageni Act as follows:

“1. Whether suit is not maintainable in view of provision of “The Conferment of Ownership on Mulageni or volamulageni Tenants Act, 2011?

2. Whether defendant proves that this court has got no jurisdiction to try the suit?”

3. The Additional Issue No.1 was treated as the preliminary issue by the learned Trial Court and the preliminary issue were heard and decided by the learned Trial Court. As stated above, by the Impugned Order, the learned Trial Court has found that in terms of Section 10 of the Mulageni Act, the Civil Court has no jurisdiction to try and decide the suit.

4. Section 10 of the Mulageni Act provides a bar on the Civil Court deciding matters under the Mulageni Act, while sub-section (2) of the section 10 provides that pending proceedings be transferred to the authority appointed under the Mulageni Act on the date of the Mulageni Act for the following:

“10. Bar of jurisdiction.-(1) Except as provided in this Act, no Civil Court shall have jurisdiction to settle, decide or deal with any question which is by or under this Act is required to be settled, decided or dealt with by the competent authority or th