Karnataka High Court
Sri. Manjunatha K vs The State Of Karnataka on 6 August, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:31658
WP No. 19287 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
WRIT PETITION NO. 19287 OF 2024 (KLR-RES)
BETWEEN:
SRI. MANJUNATHA .K
S/O. KARIYAPPA
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS
R/AT NO. 229, 2ND CROSS
SINGAYYANAPALYA
MAHADEVAPURA POST
BENGALURU-560 048.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. G.B. MANJUNATHA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
AND LAND REFORMS
Digitally signed
by CHAITHRA A REPRESENTED BY ITS
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
Location: HIGH
COURT OF VIDHANA SOUDHA
KARNATAKA DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
BENGALURU-560 001.
2. THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT
KEMPEGOWDA ROAD
BENGALURU-560 009.
3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
BENGALURU NORTH SUB-DIVISION
KANDAYA BHAVAN, K.G. ROAD
BENGALURU-560 009.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:31658
WP No. 19287 of 2024
4. THE TAHSILDAR
BENGALURU EAST TALUK
K.R. PURAM
BENGALURU-560 036.
5. SMT. KANTHAMMA
W/O PUTTASWAMY @ SURESH
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS
R/AT SINGAYYANAPALYA
MAHADEVAPURA POST
BENGALURU-560 048.
6. SMT. JAYA .K
W/O AMARNATH
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS
NO. 39, AKASHAYA NILAYA
5TH CROSS, RAJARAM LAYOUT
K. CHANNASANDRA
HORAMAVU POST
BENGALURU-560 113.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. B.P. RADHA, AGA)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE
IMPUGNED ORDER DTD 07.06.2024 PASSED IN CASE NO.
RP 196/2015-16 BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU
URBAN DISTRICT,BENGALURU I.E. THE R2, VIDE ANNEXURE-J,
AS THE SAME IS ILLEGAL AND VOID-AB-INITIO AND DISMISS
IMPLEADING APPLICATION FILED BY THE R6 AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:31658
WP No. 19287 of 2024
ORAL ORDER
Learned AGA is directed to accept notice to
respondents 1 to 4.
2. The captioned petition is filed assailing the
order passed by respondent No.2/Deputy Commissioner
on an impleading application filed by the petitioner's sister
i.e. respondent No.6.
3. The dispute in the captioned petition revolves
around the petitioner's claim over the petition lands based
on a Will alleged to have been executed by his paternal
uncle. Petitioner's name was mutated in the revenue
records based on the Will, which was challenged by
respondent No.5 in an appeal before respondent
No.3/Assistant Commissioner, who has set aside the order
and remanded back the matter to respondent
No.4/Tahsildar. Assailing the remand order, petitioner
has approached respondent No.2/Deputy Commissioner by
filing revision.
NC: 2024:KHC:31658
4. The issue relating to right to seek mutation
based on a Will is no more res integra. The said
controversy is given a quietus by the judgment rendered
by the Full Bench of this Court in the case C.N. Nagendra
Singh .vs. The Special Deputy Commissioner,
Bengaluru District and others, Bengaluru1.
Reiterating the law laid down by the Full Bench, this Court
consistently in catena of judgments has held that the party
asserting right based on a Will cannot seek mutation under
Section 129 of The Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964.
The case on hand is not an exception to the law laid down
by this Court in the judgment cited supra. The
proceedings before the Deputy Commissioner and the
remand order passed by respondent No.2 are of no
consequence. Petitioner is asserting title based on a Will.
The fact that it is disputed by his two sisters, petitioner
has to substantiate his title by proving the Will in the
manner known to law. The disputes surrounding the Will
cannot be examined in mutation proceedings. In the light
ILR 2002 KAR 2750
NC: 2024:KHC:31658
of the judgment rendered by the Full Bench in the case of
Nagendra Singh, the writ petition is not maintainable.
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.
The petitioner is at liberty to establish his right by
approaching the competent civil Court.
Sd/-
(SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM)
JUDGE
ALB
