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) 13246

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
ANU SIVARAMAN AND VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
SMT DEVAMMA – Appellant
Versus
THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER – Respondent
WA 880/2023



HC-KAR IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT APPEAL NO.880/2023 (SC/ST)

C/W WRIT APPEAL NO.936/2023 (SC/ST)

IN W.A. No.880/2023:

BETWEEN:

1. SMT. DEVAMMA W/O LATE MARIDEVA NAYAKA AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS.

2. SRI. SIDDARAJU W/O LATE MARIDEVA NAYAKA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS.

Digitally signed by ARSHIFA

3. SMT. SAKAMMA BAHAR KHANAM D/O LATE MARIDEVA NAYAKA Location: HIGH AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS.

COURT OF KARNATAKA ALL ARE RESIDING AT KUMARABEEDU VILLAGE ILUWALA HOBLI, MYSURU TALUK MYSURU 570026.

…APPELLANTS (BY SRI. VIJAY A.M. ADV.,)

HC-KAR AND:

1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER MYSURU DISTRICT MYSURU 570001.

2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER MYSURU SUB DIVISION MYSURU 570001.

3. SMT. MANJULA W/O N. SWAMY AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS.

4. SRI. N. SWAMY S/O B.P. SIDDALINGEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS. RESPONDENT NOS.3 & 4 ARE R/AT NO.1026

4TH BLOCK, BANK COLONY BOGADI, MYSURU 570026.

5. SRI. SHIVANNA S/O LATE BODARA NAYAKA AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS R/OF KUMARABEEDU VILLAGE ILWALA HOBLI, MYSURU TALUK MYSURU 570026. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. KIRAN KUMAR, HCGP FOR R1 & R2 SRI. Y.K. NARAYANA SHARMA, ADV., FOR R3 & R4 R5 SERVED)

- - -

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN WRIT PETITION No.14987/2022 (SC-ST) ON THE FILE OF THE HC-KAR LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 28/06/2022 PASSED IN WRIT PETITION No. 14987/2022 (SC-ST), THEREBY DISMISSING THE SAID WRIT PETITION & ETC.

IN W.A. NO.936/2023:

BETWEEN:

SRI. CHENNAIAH ALIAS CHENNANAIKA AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS S/O LATE HETTA NAIKA R/AT. KUMARABEEDU VILLAGE NO.1, ILAWALA HOBLI MYSURU TALUK 570 026.

...APPELLANT (BY SRI. VIJAY A.M. ADV.,)

AND:

1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER MYSURU DISTRICT MYSURU 570001.

2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER MYSURU SUB-DIVISION MYSURU 570001.

3. SMT. MANJULA W/O N. SWAMY AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS.

4. SRI. N. SWAMY S/O B.P. SIDDALINGEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS.

HC-KAR RESPONDENT NOS.3 & 4 ARE RESIDING AT NO.1026

4TH BLOCK, BANK COLONY BOGADI, MYSURU 570026.

...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. KIRAN KUMAR, HCGP FOR R1 & R2 SRI. Y.K. NARAYANA SHARMA, ADV., FOR R3 & R4)

- - -

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN WRIT PETITION No.14989/2022 (SC-ST) ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 12.07.2023 PASSED IN WRIT PETITION No. 14989/2022 (SC-ST), THEREBY DISMISSING THE SAID WRIT PETITION & ETC.

THESE WRIT APPEALS HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED ON 18.02.2026, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT, THIS DAY VIJAYKUMAR A.

PATIL J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL HC-KAR

CAV JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) Writ Appeal No.880/2023 is filed challenging the order of the learned Single Judge dated 28.06.2023 passed in W.P.No.14987/2022 (SC-ST).

Writ Appeal No.936/2023 is filed challenging the order of the learned Single Judge dated 12.07.2023 passed in W.P.No.14989/2022 (SC-ST).

2. Sri.Vijay A.M, learned counsel appearing for the appellants in both the appeals submits that the learned Single Judge has committed an error in allowing the writ petitions without appreciating the material available on record in its proper perspective. It is submitted that the learned Single Judge has committed an error in holding that the lands in question are not granted lands as defined under Section 3(e) of the Karnataka Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') as the same were purchased through a public auction. The said HC-KAR finding is erroneous as the lands were transferred at the auction at an upset price of only Rs.20/- and not at the then prevailing market value. It is further submitted that the learned Single Judge has also committed an error

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