AI Overview...

Khaneshumari Number - The court has held that the Khaneshumari number is not essential for the registration of property documents. It is not mandatory to include this number in property registration processes, as evidenced by the court quashing circulars that forbade registration based solely on Khaneshumari numbers. A. BHASKAR VS STATE OF KARNATAKA - Karnataka
Cross-Referencing Property Details - Authorities are advised to implement search facilities that allow cross-referencing between survey numbers, Khaneshumari numbers, Khatha numbers, municipal numbers, and CTS numbers to ensure accurate property identification and avoid discrepancies. Such cross-referencing aids in resolving disputes and verifying ownership. Vandana Infra Estates A Partnership Firm VS Bangalore Development Authority, Sankey Road - Karnataka, M/S VANDANA INFRA ESTATES v/s BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY - Karnataka, M/S VANDANA INFRA ESTATES vs BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY - Karnataka
Discrepancies and Legal Disputes - Several cases highlight discrepancies in Khaneshumari numbers, with courts noting issues such as incorrect or inconsistent numbering, absence of clear boundaries, and conflicting documentation. For instance, some cases mention discrepancies between old and new Khaneshumari numbers, leading to disputes over property ownership and boundaries. Courts emphasize the importance of proper documentation and cross-verification to establish clear titles. Chikkavenkataiah, S/o Late Muddaiah vs Ningegowda @ Umesh, S/o Late D L Madhegowda - Karnataka, Shanthamma W/o Basavaraja Gowda vs GANAPA @ GAMAPPA, S/O SHIVAPPA - Karnataka, Y. S. Subbanna VS Y. S. Lakshman Rao - Karnataka
Ownership and Boundary Clarifications - In specific cases, the courts scrutinized property boundaries linked to Khaneshumari numbers, sometimes relying on sale deeds or physical measurements. Proper boundary description and accurate numbering are crucial for establishing ownership rights, especially when disputes arise over property boundaries or numbering errors. Mohanachar VS K. Sreedhara - Karnataka
Administrative and Procedural Recommendations - Authorities are encouraged to maintain updated and accurate records of Khaneshumari numbers, ensuring they are linked correctly to survey, Khatha, and municipal numbers. This facilitates transparency, reduces litigations, and improves property registration and transfer processes. Vandana Infra Estates A Partnership Firm VS Bangalore Development Authority, Sankey Road - Karnataka, SRI PILLAPPA M vs SRI MUNIKAVERAPPA - Karnataka

Summary: The Khaneshumari number, while historically used for property identification, is not mandatory for registration but plays a significant role in property records and disputes. Accurate cross-referencing among various property identifiers is essential for clarity and legal certainty. Discrepancies in Khaneshumari numbers can lead to disputes, underscoring the need for precise documentation and updated records. Courts recommend systematic cross-referencing and administrative diligence to prevent conflicts and facilitate proper property management.

Search Results for "Khaneshumari Number"

1993 0 Supreme(Kar) 260 • India - Karnataka

G.P.SHIVAPRAKASH

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that 'khaneshumari' number is not essential for registration of documents pertaining to properties ... court quashed the Circulars dated 9-2-1993 and 24-5-1993, which forbade registration of documents pertaining to properties bearing 'khaneshumari ... issued by the Revenue Department of the State Government, which forbade registration of documents pertaining to properties bearing 'khaneshumari ... ... ( 27 ) IN the light of the above discussion on various legal aspects submitted by the l....

Vandana Infra Estates A Partnership Firm VS Bangalore Development Authority, Sankey Road

2022 0 Supreme(Kar) 205 • India - Karnataka

SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

, Khaneshumari numbers and survey numbers, Court of considered opinion that directions are required to be issued to concerned authorities ... and khatha numbers without reference to survey number. ... order of demolition - Application for building license - Petitioner has suppressed fact by not tracing title to concerned survey numbers ... To have search facility to cross-reference search of each of the above details with each other for example survey numbers to the K....

2023 0 Supreme(Kar) 1018 • India - Karnataka

H. P. SANDESH

Whether the courts were justified in deciding the case without determining the boundaries of Khaneshumari Nos. 9 and 10? 2. ... On the other hand, the defendant relied upon the document at Ex.D1 - sale deed which was executed by defendant No.2 in favour of defendant No.1 in respect of Khaneshumari No.9 and mentioned the measurement as 28 x 70 feet bounded on east by Tamarind tree and remaining portion of the very same number, ... of Khaneshumari No.10 and the defendant claims right in respect of Khaneshumari#HL....

K. S. Rajeswari VS Muttaiah Since Dead By His Lrs.

2012 0 Supreme(Kar) 1140 • India - Karnataka

B.MANOHAR

The said land was not converted land, in view of that khaneshumari number was given. She deposed that she does not know whether Narasimhaiah and his brother Ramaiah sold their land in favour of the Society. The first defendant has constructed the house. ... No. 146, thereafter the Village Panchayat has assigned Khaneshumari number to the sites formed by the second defendant. Accordingly, site No. 13 has been given to the site purchased by the plaintiff, which was measuring East to West 40 feet and North to South 30 feet.....

Chikkavenkataiah, S/o Late Muddaiah vs Ningegowda @ Umesh, S/o Late D L Madhegowda

2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 21722 • India - IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

V.SRISHANANDA

Likewise, with regard to the Khaneshumari number, there are discrepancies that has been noticed by the First Appellate Court. Whereas, under Ex.P1 it is only shown as site No.1, but in Khaneshumari number, it was mentioned as No.56/1 and later on No.112/56/1. ... This document does not depicts the Kaneshumari number, but refers site number No.1. Even though, it is evidence of Pw-1 that the Hakku Patra granted to the plaintiff in the year 1972. Here itself, there is no....

2014 0 Supreme(Kar) 576 • India - Karnataka

A.V.CHANDRASHEKARA

According to him, schedule 'A' and 'B' properties bearing Khaneshumari Nos.69, 66/1 and 130 do not exist. According to him, old Khaneshumari number is incorporated in the Mandal Panchayats and a new number is given and the same is 97. ... Schedule 'a' bears Khaneshumari No.69 measuring 40 feet East to West and 56 feet North to South. Schedule 'b' measures Khaneshumari No.66/1 renumbered as 30 measuring East to West 40 feet and North to South 40 feet. ... According to him, old #HL_START....

Shanthamma W/o Basavaraja Gowda vs GANAPA @ GAMAPPA, S/O SHIVAPPA

2025 0 Supreme(Kar) 788 • India - IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

ASHOK S.KINAGI

The property descriptions and ownership records were disputed, especially concerning khaneshumari numbers linked to both parties. ... determined that the plaintiff did not sufficiently prove her ownership or the defendants' illegal actions regarding the property of khaneshumari ... During the course of cross-examination of PW.2, he gave an evasive reply regarding the number to the properties given based on the sequence of properties. ... He has stated that he has given the number to properties based on ....

M/S VANDANA INFRA ESTATES v/s BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

2022 Supreme(Online)(KAR) 73 • India - High Court of Karnataka

SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

To have search facility to cross-reference search of each of the above details with each other for example survey numbers to the Khatha numbers, Khaneshumari numbers to Survey number, Khaneshumari numbers to Khatha numbers, Khatha number to Municipal number, Municipal number to CTS number, Survey Number ... To consolidate and cross-reference the survey #HL_START....

• India - Karnataka

Whenever a khatha/Khaneshumari certificate is issued the same to refer to survey number, khaneshumari number, municipal number, CTS number p style="text-align ... to Survey number, Khaneshumari numbers to Khatha numbers, Khatha number to Municipal number, Municipal number to CTS number, Survey Number to House list #HL....

2024 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 38791 • India - Karnataka High Court

It is submitted that in the suit, the respondent herein has wrongly shown the property number of the suit schedule property bearing old Khaneshumari No.181/2 as new Khaneshumari No.248 which belongs to the petitioners, however the new Khaneshumari number of the property of the respondent is No.249.

Filter by Legal Phrase

Legal Issues on Supreme Today AI

Approbate and Reprobate: Key Legal Doctrine Explained Vague Threatening Phone Calls: Why They Fail in Court Does SCC Own Copyright on Full Text Judgments? G.O. Ms No. 108: TN Salesman & Packer Recruitment Rules Article 226 vs 227: Key Differences in High Court Powers Judgments on One-Time GNA Charges in India TIP: Judicial vs Executive Magistrate Rules Explained Can a Sole Dissenting Member Block Society Redevelopment? How to Sue Fake Facebook Accounts for Defamation in India Illustrations: Person Dominating Will in Indian Law Perusal in Court Orders: What It Means in Law Litigant Vigilance: Essential Duty in Court Proceedings What to Do If Company Suit Signatory Dies Renting House Without Rent Agreement in India: Risks Stay on Money Realization After Ejectment: Is It Possible?