IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT APPEAL NO.745/2023 (KLR-RR/SUR)

BETWEEN:

R. SRINIVAS S/O V. RAMANAND Digitally signed AGED 45 YEARS by ARSHIFA R/AT. NO.13, SWWC LAYOUT BAHAR KHANAM BEHIND KEB POWER STATION Location: HIGH 4TH PHASE, YELAHANKA NEW TOWN COURT OF BENGALURU 560054.

KARNATAKA …APPELLANT (BY SRI. MAHENDRA S.S. ADV.,)

AND:

1. SANJEEVAPPA S/O LATE ANJINAPPA AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS R/AT. MYLAPPANAHALLI VILLAGE HESARAGHATTA HOBLI BENGALURU NORTH TALUK 560089.

2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BENGALURU NORTH DIVISION (ADDL)

KANDAYA BHAVAN BENGALURU 560009.

3. THE TAHSILDAR BENGALURU NORTH TALUK (ADDL)

OPP. CANARA BANK YELAHANKA NEW TOWN BENGALURU 560064.

4. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT KANDAYA BHAVAN BENGALURU 560009.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K.N. NITISH, ADV., FOR SMT. VANITHA DEVI V, ADV., FOR R1 SMT. PRAMODHINI KISHAN, AGA FOR R2 TO R4)

- - -

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 11.04.2023 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WRIT PETITION No.10152/2018 (KLR-RR/SUR) IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. IT IS MOST HUMBLY PRAYED THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI AND QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 18.11.2015 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN R.A. No.(BNA) 587/2014-15 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-K IN THE WRIT PETITION IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE & ETC.

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED ON 23.02.2026, 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

CAV JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) This appeal is filed by the appellant under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961, challenging the order dated 11.04.2023 passed in W.P.No.10152/2018 (KLR-

RR/SUR) by the learned Single Judge.

2. The brief facts leading to the filing of this appeal are that the appellant is the owner of land bearing Sy.No.83/2 measuring 1 acre situated at Mylappanahalli Village, Hesaraghatta Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk. The respondent No.3-Tahasildar, as per the direction of the respondent No.2 entered the name of the respondent No.1 in the revenue records in terms of the compromise decree dated 25.02.2015 in O.S.No.103/2015. The respondent No.3 altered the records as per the order of the respondent No.2 dated 18.11.2015, wherein the appellant noticed that the extent of land in his name as per the revenue records in Sy.No.83/2 was altered from 1 acre to 20 guntas. The appellant filed a suit in O.S.No.1507/2015 seeking permanent injunction against the respondent No.1 and another. The appellant also challenged the order of the respondent No.2 dated 18.11.2015 before the respondent No.4 which was dismissed with a finding that the same would be subject to the outcome of the suit in O.S.No.1507/2015. The appellant assailed the order passed by the respondent Nos.2 and 4 before the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.10152/2018. The learned Single Judge, vide the impugned order dismissed the petition and held that status quo should be maintained with regard to the revenue entries of the land in question subject to the outcome of O.S.No.1507/2015. Being aggrieved, this appeal is filed.

3. Sri.Mahendra S.S, learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the learned Single Judge has not considered the material on record in its proper perspective. It is submitted that the compromise decree in O.S.No.103/2015 was obtained by fraudulent means and the appellant was also not a party to the same due to which the said decree could not have been the sole basis to order for change in the revenue entries. It is further submitted that the respondent No.2 directed the respondent No.3 to change the revenue entries in terms of the compromise decree and the sam