[Cites 7, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Smt.Nanjamma vs State Of Karnataka on 8 December, 2025
Author: S Sunil Dutt Yadav
Bench: S Sunil Dutt Yadav
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:51666
WP No. 3594 of 2022
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV
WRIT PETITION NO. 3594 OF 2022 (KLR-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT.NANJAMMA
W/O LATE P. ERAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,
2. SMT. MANJULA N. E.
D/O LATE P ERAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
3. N. E. RAJESHWARI
D/O LATE P ERAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,
ALL RESIDENTS OF NAGONDANAHALLI
VILLAGE, BANGALORE EAST TALUK,
Digitally signed by
VIDYA G R BENGALURU-560066.
Location: HIGH COURT
OF KARNATAKA ALL ARE REPRESENTED BY THEIR GPA HOLDER
NARAYANAREDDY S/O NARAYANA REDDY,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
R/O NAGONDAHALLI VILLAGE,
K. R. PURAM HOBLI,
BANGALORE EAST TALUK,
BENGALURU-560066.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. GOWTHAMDEV C. ULLAL, ADVOCATE)
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:51666
WP No. 3594 of 2022
HC-KAR
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
DEPARTMENT OF HOME,
VIDHANASOUDHA, BANGALORE-01,
BY ITS SECRETARY.
2. THE TAHSILDAR,
BENGALURU EAST TALUK,
K R PURAM, BENGALURU.
3. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS,
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
SURVEY SETTLEMENT,
BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT,
BENGALURU-560009.
4. JOINT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS,
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT,
BENGALURU-560009.
5. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS,
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISIONER,
BENGALURU EAST TALUK,
K R PURAM, BENGALURU-560009.
6. SMT. K. POORNIMA SRINIVAS
W/O D. T. SRINIVAS,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
11, KSHEMYADHATRI NILAYA,
THIPPAIAH LAYOUT, DEVASANDRA,
K R PURAM, BANGALORE-560036
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SPOORTHY HEGDE, HCGP FOR R1 TO R5;
SRI. MANMOHAN P.N., ADVOCATE FOR R6)
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:51666
WP No. 3594 of 2022
HC-KAR
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
ENDORSEMENT DATED 28.06.2021 IN NO.L.N.D/CR/754/2011-
12 AND L.N.D/CR/29/2017-18 ISSUED BY THE R2 VIDE
ANNEXURE-A AND DIRECT THE R2 TO 5 TO COMPLETE PHODI
PROCEEDINGS AND ISSUE NEW SURVEY NUMBER TO THE
PETITIONERS SCHEDULE PROPERTY AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV
ORAL ORDER
The petitioners have challenged the endorsement at
Annexure-A dated 28.06.2021, whereby the Tahsildar has
rejected the request of the petitioner for phodi and
durasth. The rejection of such request is insofar as there
are certain disputes relating to possession as made out
from the report of the Tahsildar Grade-II.
2. The facts relevant for the purpose of disposal of
the present writ petition is that the petitioners claim rights
with respect to an extent of 3 acres in Survey No.42 of
Pattandur Agrahara Village, K.R. Puram Hobli on the basis
of a sale deed stated to have been executed by Muniyappa
S/o Dodde Gowdana Kempanna in favour of Late Papaiah
NC: 2025:KHC:51666
HC-KAR
dated 03.12.1951. The petitioners submit that the said
Muniyappa was claiming rights through the original
Jodidhar and subsequently O.S.No.24/2000 came to be
filed before the Additional Civil Judge by Erappa who is the
husband of the 1st petitioner and father of petitioners No.2
and 3. The said suit was filed against the State seeking for
the relief of declaration on the ground that the said Erappa
had perfected title by way of adverse possession. The suit
came to be decreed which judgment was taken up in
appeal by the State in RA.No.83/2001 which affirmed the
judgment, which was eventually taken up by the State in
RSA.No.156/2007 and the same is also stated to have
been dismissed affirming the judgment and decree passed
in O.S.No.24/2000. SLP(Civil)No.29520/2008 filed against
the judgment and decree in RSA came to be rejected.
Accordingly, it is claimed by the petitioners that rights
have been crystallized as ordered in O.S.No.24/2000. The
petitioners subsequently sought for effecting of mutation
NC: 2025:KHC:51666
HC-KAR
entry and MR.No.5/2011-12 came to be effected in the
name of the petitioners.
3. It is the case of the petitioners that after
effecting of mutation entry, the petitioners had made a
application of request for phodi and durasth, however the
same has been rejected in terms of the endorsement at
Annexure-A. The ground mentioned in the endorsement at
Annexure-A is that there were certain disputes with
respect to possession and records regarding original grant
were not available.
4. The petitioners submits that their title is
affirmed by virtue of decree in O.S.No.24/2000 which has
been affirmed in regular appeal as well as regular second
appeal and has attained finality by virtue of rejection of
Special Leave to Appeal. It is submitted that the State is a
party in all such legal proceedings and after conclusion of
such civil disputes, the mutation has been effected in the
name of petitioners in MR.No.5/2011-12. It is submitted
NC: 2025:KHC:51666
HC-KAR
that thereafter what remains is only the phodi
proceedings.
5. Learned counsel Sri. P.N.Manmohan appearing
for the private respondent submits that there are disputes
pending between the petitioners and the private
respondent that even as on date W.P.No.23110/2022 is
pending consideration. Further submitted that the private
respondent is not a party in the proceedings of
O.S.No.24/2000 and the only parties to the said
proceedings were the State and the petitioners. It is
further submitted that there are serious disputes between
the parties.
6. It must be noticed that once the mutation
entries are duly certified and no dispute exists, once the
mutation is recorded in the register of mutations, which is
a reflection of acquisition of rights under Section 128 of
the Karnataka Land Revenue Act (for short 'the Act'), the
next stage is the proceedings of phodi. In terms of Rule 72
NC: 2025:KHC:51666
HC-KAR
of Chapter X of the Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, the
process of phodi i.e., effecting measurements, mapping of
sub-divisions and apportioning of assessment in respect of
sub-divisions resulting from mutation would commence.
Rule 72 of Chapter X of the Karnataka Land Revenue
Rules, 1966 reads as follows:
"72. After mutation entries are certified under
Rule 66 and after disposal of such disputes as
might come up for decision under Rule 67, or
after disposal of an appeal, under Rule 69, the
relevant records shall be sent by the Tahsildar to
the Assistant Superintendent of Land Records, for
[effecting] measurements, mapping of sub-
divisions, and apportioning of assessment in
respect of sub-divisions resulting from mutation.
Rules 47 to 57 both inclusive, shall apply mutatis
mutandis to such cases."
7. It must be noticed that once the revenue entry
in terms of mutation has attained finality, in terms of the
procedure under Chapter-X, phodi proceedings are to be
initiated. In the event of any inter-se dispute between the
parties, the procedure followed insofar as disputes, is also
to be addressed in terms of the scheme of the Land
Revenue Act and Rules.
NC: 2025:KHC:51666
HC-KAR
8. It must be noticed that the proceedings of phodi
will have to be taken to a logical finality. In the event
there are any inter-se disputes between the petitioners
and the private respondent in the form of a dispute
between neighboring property owners, the procedure
under Section 140 of the Act will have to be resorted to.
Needless to state, the scope of proceedings before the
revenue authorities cannot have the effect of entering into
the questions of title. While the petitioners claim
declaration of title in terms of the judgment and decree in
O.S.No.24/2000 and trace their right to the sale deed
dated 03.12.1951, the private respondent on the other
hand claims title by virtue of sale deed dated 05.12.1958
and the order of re-grant.
9. It must be noticed that though the counsel for
the respondent submits there are disputes regarding
possession, however what is to be noticed is that in terms
of the hierarchy of records, the documents of title in terms
of provisions of the Transfer of Property Act or Orders of
NC: 2025:KHC:51666
HC-KAR
Civil Court that would vest title, are documents that would
bind the revenue authorities.
10. It is pursuant to such documents of title that
the revenue entries as contemplated under Section 128 of
the Act are affected and such revenue entries in terms of
mutation would have to follow the acquisition of title.
While considering such acquisition of title, the petitioners'
rights are claimed through Civil Court decree, though
originally right is claimed through a sale deed. Once the
mutation entry has been entered in the register, there
ends the second stage of rights of the petitioners.
11. Subsequently, under Chapter-X of the
Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, phodi proceedings have to
commence. At such stage, the endorsement made by the
respondent in-effect, is the inability stated by the
respondent authorities to go ahead with the phodi
proceedings on the ground as mentioned in the
endorsement. The endorsement cannot have the effect of
- 10 -
NC: 2025:KHC:51666
HC-KAR
rewriting rights of the petitioners which have attained
finality by virtue of the decree in O.S.No.24/2000.
Accordingly, there cannot be any unwillingness of the
State to go ahead by ignoring the judgment and decree
passed in favour of the petitioners which has attained
finality between the petitioners and the State authorities.
12. If there are other issues that may crop up as
either a boundary dispute or regards to the availability of
extent of land etc., that is a matter to be looked into in
terms of the procedure provided for in the Karnataka Land
Revenue Act and Rules relating to phodi and durasth. The
reasons mentioned in the endorsement with references to
the non-regrant in favour of the petitioners or the
Inamdar, cannot be a question that could be re-opened as
question of title has now attained finality. What would
remain is only dispute if any, inter-se between the
petitioners and private respondent, which is a matter that
has to be taken note of in terms of the scheme of the Land
Revenue Act and Rules.
- 11 -
NC: 2025:KHC:51666
HC-KAR
13. All contentions of both sides are kept open. The
endorsement at Annexure-A is set aside and the
authorities are to proceed with phodi proceedings and in
the event of any dispute raised by the private respondent,
same is to be taken note of as per existing procedure.
Needless to state, questions regarding title which have
attained finality by virtue of the judgment and decree of
O.S.No.24/2000 cannot be raised again.
14. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.
SD/-
(S SUNIL DUTT YADAV)
JUDGE
MCR
