Karnataka High Court
Chandrakant vs The State Of Karnataka on 21 August, 2025
Author: Jyoti Mulimani
Bench: Jyoti Mulimani
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4843
WP No. 200669 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI
WRIT PETITION NO.200669 OF 2025 (KLR-RR/SUR)
BETWEEN:
CHANDRAKANT
S/O LATE RAGHUNATH JOGUR MARATHI,
AGE ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O JOGUR VILLAGE,
TQ. & DIST. KALABURAGI-585310.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. PREETAM DEULGAONKAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
VARSHA N THROUGH ITS SECRETARY,
RASALKAR
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,
Location: HIGH
COURT OF M. S. BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001.
KARNATAKA
2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
OFFICE OF D. C. KALABURAGI-585101.
3. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
KALABURAGI-585101.
4. TAHASILDAR,
KALABURAGI-585101.
5. DEPUTY TAHASILDAR,
FARHATABAD, DIST. KALABURAGI-585101.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4843
WP No. 200669 of 2025
HC-KAR
6. SHARADABAI W/O TUKARAM JADHAV,
AGE ABOUT 40 YEARS,
OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
MATOLI VILLAGE,
TQ. AFZALPUR, DIST. KALABURAGI-585301.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MALLIKARJUN SAHUKAR, AGA FOR R1 TO R5;
R6 SERVED)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN
RELIEFS.
THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS
UNDER:
ORAL ORDER
Sri.Preetam Deulgaonkar., counsel for the petitioner and
Sri.Mallikarjun Sahukar., AGA for respondents 1 to 5 have
appeared in person.
Notice to respondent No.6 was ordered on 11.03.2025. A
perusal of the office note depicts that respondent No.6 is
served and unrepresented. Respondent No.6 has neither
engaged the services of an advocate nor conducted the case as
a party in person.
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4843
HC-KAR
2. The captioned Writ Petition is filed seeking following
reliefs.
I. Issue a Writ of Certiorari to set aside the order
dated:07.11.2024 passed by the second respondent
vide Annexure-N.
II. Issue a Writ of Certiorari to set aside the order
dated:07.11.2023 passed by the third respondent
vide Annexure-L.
III. Issue a Writ of Certiorari to quash the From No.12
issued by the fourth respondent dated:31.10.2023
by showing the name of the sixth respondent to the
extent of 5 acres 04 guntas out of the total 18 acres
9 guntas in Sy.No.146/1 situated at village Jogur,
Taluk and District: Kalaburagi vide Annexure-K.
IV. Issue a Writ of Mandamus directing respondents 2,
3, 4 and 5 for rectifying the revenue entries in
Sy.No.146/1 situated at village Jogur, Taluk and
District: Kalaburagi, as it was earlier to the
impugned orders.
Counsel for the respective parties urged several
contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the Writ papers
with care.
3. Suffice it to note that a suit was filed by Sharadabai
and Sonubai against the petitioner and others in
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4843
HC-KAR
O.S.No.283/2010 on the file of the V Addl. Civil Judge,
Kalaburagi. The Trial Court vide Judgment and Decree dated
09.03.2018, partly decreed the suit. Assailing the Judgment
and Decree of the Trial Court, an appeal was preferred by the
defendants before the Appellate Court in R.A.No.32/2018. The
Appellate Court vide Judgment and Decree dated 10.12.2020,
partly allowed the appeal. Aggrieved by the Judgment and
Decree of the Appellate Court, an appeal was filed before this
Court in RSA No.200098/2021. This Court vide order dated
08.12.2022, had framed the substantial question of law and
stayed the drawing up of final decree.
As things stood thus, the plaintiff - Sharadabai moved
before the competent revenue authorities to enter her name in
the revenue records as per the preliminary decree. The
Assistant Commissioner communicated to the Thasildar on
07.11.2023 and directed to mutate the name of Sharadabai in
the revenue records as per the Court Order. The said
communication was questioned by the petitioner before the
Deputy Commissioner. The Deputy Commissioner issued an
endorsement on 07.11.2024 stating that there is a civil case
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4843
HC-KAR
pending before the High Court. Hence, the petitioner is before
this Court. It is not in dispute that the rights of the parties are
yet to be decided by this Court in the Regular Second Appeal.
Hence, the revenue authorities could not have proceeded to
mutate the name of Sharadabai in the revenue records.
Therefore, the orders passed by the revenue authorities are
liable to be quashed. Accordingly, they are quashed.
4. The Writ of Certiorari is ordered. The order dated
07.11.2024 passed by the second respondent vide Annexure-N,
the order dated:07.11.2023 passed by the third respondent
vide Annexure-L and the Form No.12 issued by the fourth
respondent dated 31.10.2023 vide Annexure-K are quashed.
5. Resultantly, the Writ Petition is allowed.
Sd/-
(JYOTI MULIMANI)
JUDGE
MRP,VNR
