Karnataka High Court
Sri Shankarappa vs The Deputy Commissioner on 10 July, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:25298
WP No. 19352 of 2024
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JULY, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
WRIT PETITION NO. 19352 OF 2024 (KLR-RR/SUR)
BETWEEN:
SRI SHANKARAPPA
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
S/O LATE PAPANNA
AMBEDKAR NAGAR
KOLAR 563101
KOLAR DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. MUNI REDDY M N., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
Digitally signed by KOLAR DISTRICT
JUANITA
THEJESWINI KOLAR - 563101.
Location: HIGH
COURT OF 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
KARNATAKA
KOLAR SUB DIVISION
KOLAR - 563101.
3. THE TAHSILDAR
KOLAR TALUK
MALUR - 563101.
4. SRI MOHAMEED SADIQ
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS
S/O LATE SHIEK AHAMED
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:25298
WP No. 19352 of 2024
HC-KAR
R/A 801, 2AC, 1ST BLOCK
HRBR LAYOUT, KALYANANAGAR
BANGALORE 560043.
5. SRI. MUNISWAMY @ SUBAIAH
S/O A.K.KALAPPA
AGE MAJOR, 2ND CROSS, KOTE
KOLAR - 563101.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. KEMPANNA., AAG A/W
SMT. NAVYA SHEKHAR., AGA FOR R1 TO R3
SRI. V. LAKSHMINARAYANA., SR. ADVOCATE A/W
SRI. CHAND PASHA., ADVOCATE FOR R4)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER
DTD. 16.07.2024 IN R.A.P.NO. 101/2024 PASSED BY THE R-1
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, KOLAR, PRODUCED AS ANNX-A AND
GRANT AN INTERIM ORDER TO STAY ALL FURTHER
PROCEEDINGS PURSUANT TO THE ORDER DTD. 16.07.2024 IN
R.A.P.NO. 101/2024 PASSED BY THE R-1 DEPUTY
COMMISSIONER, KOLAR, PRODUCED ALONG WITH THIS
PETITION AS ANNX-A AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS
UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
ORAL ORDER
In this writ petition, the petitioner is assailing the
order dated 16.07.2024 in R.A.P.No.101/2024 passed by
respondent No.1 (Annexure 'A').
NC: 2025:KHC:25298
HC-KAR
2. Heard Sri. M.N.Munireddy, learned Counsel
appearing for the petitioner, Sri. V.Lakshminarayana,
learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri. Chand
Pasha, learned Counsel for respondent No.4 and Sri.
Kempanna learned Additional Advocate General along with
Smt. Navya Shekar learned Additional Government
Advocate for respondents No.1 to 3-State.
3. Sri M.N.Munireddy, learned Counsel appearing for
the petitioner invited the attention of the Court to the
details relating to the schedule properties mentioned at
Annexure 'H' and also, insofar as the details provided in
the schedule to the registered Sale Deed dated
04.03.1977, made in favour of respondent No.4 is
concerned and thereby, contended that, the schedule in
the sale deed, based on which, the impugned order has
been passed by respondent No.1 is incorrect and
accordingly, sought for interference by this Court.
4. Per contra, Sri V.Lakshminarayana, learned Senior
Counsel, appearing on behalf of Sri. Chand Pasha for
NC: 2025:KHC:25298
HC-KAR
respondent No.4 invited the attention of the Court to the
judgment and decree dated 30.11.1974 passed in
O.S.No.321/1972, wherein the defendants No.1, 3 and 4
are the vendors of respondent No.4 herein. In this regard,
it is submitted that the suit schedule property which is the
subject matter in the present writ petition is the self-
acquired property of defendant No.1 and the same has
been declared in favour of the vendors of respondent
No.4.
5. In that view of the matter, taking into consideration
the fact that, the petitioner herein is the son of the brother
of defendant No.1 in O.S.No.321/1972, it is submitted that
the impugned order passed by respondent No.1 requires
to be confirmed in this writ petition.
6. Sri Kempanna, learned Additional Advocate
General, appearing for respondents No.1 to 3 sought to
justify the impugned order at Annexure 'A' and submitted
that, based on the registered Sale Deed dated 04.03.1977,
NC: 2025:KHC:25298
HC-KAR
the mutation has been made in favour of the private
respondent No.4 herein. Accordingly, the learned
Additional Advocate General sought for dismissal of the
writ petition.
7. In the light of the submissions made by the
learned Counsel appearing for the parties and taking into
consideration of the finding recorded by the respondent-
authorities would indicate that, respondent No.4 herein
has purchased the schedule property as per the registered
Sale Deed dated 04.03.1977 from Narayanappa @
Devapriya, Subbaiah @ Munishamy and Smt.Muniyamma
W/o Subbaiah @ Munishamy, who are the vendors of
respondent No.4 and defendants No.1, 3 and 4 in
O.S.No.321/1972. The Civil Court, Kolar by judgment and
decree dated 30.11.1974 at Annexure 'R1', concluded that
the schedule property is the self-acquired property of Sri
P.Subbanna @ Munisamappa (vendor of respondent No.4
herein).
NC: 2025:KHC:25298
HC-KAR
8. In that view of the matter, taking into
consideration the fact that, the mutation has been made
pursuant to the registered Sale Deed dated 04.03.1977
and as the petitioner herein has not produced any relevant
material to establish his right in respect of the subject land
is concerned, I am of the view that, the finding recorded
by respondent No.1 in the impugned order at Annexure 'A'
is just and proper and accordingly, no interference is
called for by this Court in this writ petition.
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
(E.S.INDIRESH)
JUDGE
JT/-
CT: JL
