Smt. Bharathi Swamy vs State Of Karnataka
2023 Latest Caselaw 2461 Kant

                                          -1-
                                                       WA No. 382 of 2021




                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                       DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF MAY, 2023

                                       PRESENT
                        THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
                                          AND
                   THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
                       WRIT APPEAL NO. 382 OF 2021 (KLR-RES)
              BETWEEN:

              SMT. BHARATHI SWAMY,
              W/O SRI H. S. NANJUNDASWAMY,
              AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,
              R/A NO.2410, 1ST CROSS,
              HOSABANDIKERI, K. R. MOHALLA,
              MYSURU CITY - 570 004,
              SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT IS NOT CLAIMED.
                                                             ...APPELLANT
              (BY SRI Y. HARIPRASAD, ADVOCATE)
              AND:

              1.    STATE OF KARNATAKA,
Digitally           REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
signed by
PRAMILA G V         DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,
Location:           M. S. BUILDING,
HIGH COURT          DR B. R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
OF
KARNATAKA           BENGALURU-560001.

              2.    THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
                    MYSURU DISTRICT,
                    MYSURU-570002.

              3.    THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
                    MYSURU SUB-DIVISION,
                    MYSURU-570002.
                           -2-
                                     WA No. 382 of 2021




4.   THE TAHASILDAR,
     MYSURU TALUK,
     MYSURU - 570 002.

5.   SRI CHANNABASAPPA,
     S/O LATE PUTTAIAH,
     MAJOR,
     R/AT NO.1/174,
     DEVAIAHNAHUNDI, 2ND STAGE,
     SRIRAMPURA, MYSURU-570002.

6.   SRI P. PUTTANNA,
     S/O LATE PUTTAIAH,
     MAJOR,
     R/AT NO.22/1,
     DEVAIAHNAHUNDI 2ND STAGE,
     SRIRAMPURA, MYSURU-570002.

7.   SRI P. RAMASWAMY,
     S/O LATE PUTTAIAH,
     MAJOR,
     R/AT NO.1/174,
     DEVAIAHNAHUNDI 2ND STAGE,
     SRIRAMPURA, MYSURU - 570 002.

                                        ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT.NAMITHA MAHESH B.G, AGA FOR R1-R4,
 SRI GIRISH P, ADVOCATE FOR R6,
 SRI R. BHADRINATH, ADVOCATE FOR R5 AND R7)

    THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO:
a)    PASS NECESSARY ORDERS AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER
      DATED 19.02.2021 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE SINGLE
      JUDGE IN WP NO.3523/2021 (KLR-RES).
b)    DIRECT THE AGGRIEVED PARTIES TO FILE A CIVIL SUIT
      FOR DECLARATION BEFORE THE COMPETENT CIVIL
      COURT AND THE KATHA WILL BE SUBJECT TO THE
      RESULT OF THE SAID CIVIL SUIT.
c)    ALLOW THE WRIT APPEAL WITH COSTS.
d)    GRANT ANY RELIEF/RELIEFS.
                               -3-
                                           WA No. 382 of 2021




    THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                         JUDGMENT

This appeal is an intra Court appeal filed by the petitioner

in W.P.No.3523/2021. In terms of the impugned order dated

19.02.2021 learned Single Judge of this Court has dismissed

the Writ Petition and has confirmed the order passed by the

Deputy Commissioner in R.P. No.24/2021.

2. The Review Petition No.24/2021 on the file of

Deputy Commissioner, Mysore was filed by the contesting

respondents of this writ appeal challenging the order of the

Assistant Commissioner, wherein the Assistant Commissioner in

terms of the order dated 16.12.2020 has allowed the appeal

filed by the appellant and directed the present appellant's

name to be entered in the property records pertaining to the

disputed properties.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant in support of his

contentions would place reliance on the judgment of the Full

Bench of this Court in the case of Smt.Jayamma and Others

vs. The State of Karnataka represented by its Secretary,

Department of Revenue and others reported in 2020 SCC

WA No. 382 of 2021

online Kar 211. He contended that the Deputy Commissioner

did not notice the fact that there is a title dispute between the

parties relating to the petition property and ought to have

directed the parties to approach the competent Civil Court for

redressal of their grievance.

4. This Court has considered the contentions raised at

the bar and also considered the ratio laid down in the

aforementioned judgment. It is forthcoming from the records

that the names of the contesting respondents were entered in

the property records of the disputed property when the appeal

was filed before Assistant Commissioner. Admittedly, the

contesting respondents were not made parties in the

proceedings before the Assistant Commissioner. The provisions

of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 mandate that before

passing any orders concerning reserve entries in the record of

rights of the properties interested persons are to be notified

and have to be heard. It is to be noticed that the Deputy

Commissioner has taken a view that the names of the

contesting respondents appear in the property records and they

were necessary parties to the proceedings. The said finding is

supported by revenue records.

WA No. 382 of 2021

5. This being the position Deputy Commissioner

without expressing any opinion on the merits has remanded the

matter to Assistant Commissioner for proper adjudication after

notifying all the interested persons.

6. This Court does not find any ground to interfere in

the order. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

7. All contentions are kept open, as rights of the

parties over the disputed properties are not adjudicated.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE

GVP