Karnataka High Court
Dyamavva @ Deepa vs Gurulingappa on 16 January, 2024
Author: Hemant Chandangoudar
Bench: Hemant Chandangoudar
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:895
WP No. 108048 of 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
WRIT PETITION NO. 108048 OF 2016 (KLR-RR/SUR)
BETWEEN:
DYAMAVVA @ DEEPA
W/O MAHANTESH BUDASHETTI
AGE: 37 YEARS,
OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK
R/O. GURUWARPETH, KITTUR
TAL: BAILHONGAL
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. S.G.NANDOOR FOR SRI. S.B. DODDAGOUDAR, ADVOCATES)
AND:
1. GURULINGAPPA
S/O SHIVAPPA HUMBI
SUJATA
SUBHASH AGE: 64 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE
PAMMAR R/O. HOSUR, TQ: SAVADATTI,
DIST: BELAGAVI
Digitally signed
by SUJATA
SUBHASH
PAMMAR
Date: 2024.02.02
2. MADIWALAPPA SHIVAPPA HUMBI
21:39:37 -0800
AGE 59 YEARS, OCC: SERVICE
R/O. KOLEGAL,
DIST: CHAMRAJANAGAR
3. SOMALINGAPPA
GURULINGAPPA HUMBI
AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE R/O.
AWARADHI, TQ: BAILHONGAL
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:895
WP No. 108048 of 2016
4. IRRAVVA
W/O IRRAPPA MAVINAKOPPA
AGE: 58 YEARS,
OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK
R/O. HULLIKATTI, TQ: BAILHONGAL
5. BALAWWA
W/O BASAVANTAPPA VAKKUND
AGE: 53 YEARS,
OCC: HOUSEHOLDWORK
R/O. BENDIKGERI,
DIST: BELAGAVI
6. GANGAWWA
W/O VEERABHADRAPPA TIGADI
AGE: 52 YEARS,
OCC: HOUSEHOLDWORK
R/O. GEJAPATHI, DIST: BELAGAVI
7. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
R/BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,
M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU
8. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
BELAGAVI DISTRICT, BELAGAVI-
9. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
BAILHONGAL SUB-DIVISION, BAILHONGAL
10. THE TAHASHILDHAR, BAILHONGAL
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. PRASHANT MATHAPATI, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2 AND R4 TO R6;
SRI. V.S.KALASURMATH, HCGP FOR R7 TO R10; R3 SERVED)
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:895
WP No. 108048 of 2016
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO
i) QUASH THE ORDER DATED:02.06.2016, PASSED BY THE
RESPONDENT NO.8 i.e., THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
BELGAVI IN HIS ORDER BEARING NO.RB/RTA-92/2014-15,
BELAGAVI MARKED AT ANNEXURE-F.
ii) TO CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT
NO.9 i.e., THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BAILHONGAL, SUB-
DIVISION, BAILHONGAL DATED:21.06.2014 AS PER
ANNEXURE-E.GRANT INTERIM ORDER, TO STAY THE ORDER
DATED:02.06.2016, PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.8 i.e.,
THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BELAGAVI IN HIS ORDER
BEARING NO.RB/RTA-92/2014-15,BELAGAVI MARKED AT
ANNEXURE-F.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Based on the partition deed, the names of the
respondents No.1 and 2 were mutated in the revenue records
in the respect of the subject property. The mutation entry
effected in favour of the respondents No.1 and 2 was set aside
by the respondent No.9, against which, the respondents No.1
and 2 filed a revision under Section 13(3) of the Karnataka
Land Revenue Act. The respondent No.8-Deputy Commissioner
by the impugned order set aside the order passed by the
respondent No.9 and restored the mutation entry in favour of
the respondents No.1 and 2, against which, the present petition
is filed.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:895
3. The learned counsel for the respondents No.1 and 2
has placed on record the judgment and decree passed by the
jurisdictional Civil Court in OS No.92/2016 dismissing the suit
for partition and separate possession of the plaintiff's 1/3rd
share in the suit schedule `A' and `B' properties and
declaration that the adoption deed in favour of defendant No.6
therein is null and void and does not bind on her share.
4. The claim of the petitioner having been negated by
the Civil Court, I do not find any illegality in the impugned
order passed by the respondent No.8. However, the mutation
entry in favour of the respondents No.1 and 2 is subject to final
out come of RFA No.100017/2024.
Sd/-
JUDGE
BKM
