Karnataka High Court
K Malleshappa S/O Late Sri Kurubara ... vs The Ballari City Corporation on 11 June, 2025
Author: Pradeep Singh Yerur
Bench: Pradeep Singh Yerur
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:7548
WP No. 102502 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JUNE 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR
WRIT PETITION NO. 102502 OF 2025 (LB-RES)
BETWEEN:
K. MALLESHAPPA
S/O. LATE SRI KURUBARA DODDAPPA @ DODDANNA,
AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS,
R/AT. HOUSE NO.62, WARD NO.10,
KURUBARA STREET, NEAR BIG MARKET,
BALLARI-583101.
...PETITIONER
(BY MISS V. VIDYA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE BALLARI CITY CORPORATION,
REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER,
BALLARI-583101.
2. THE COMMISSIONER,
BALLARI CITY CORPORATION,
BALLARI-583101.
...RESPONDENTS
CHANABASAPPA
K KALLUR
(BY SRI. S.S. CHALAWADI, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
Location: HIGH OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF
COURT OF
KARNATAKA MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR
DHARWAD
BENCH DIRECTION DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE
REPRESENTATION GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER TO THE
RESPONDENTS DATED 02.02.2024 FOUND AT ANNEXURE-E AND
FURTHER DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO ENTER THE NAME OF THE
PETITIONER AND THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES OF HIS FATHER'S
BROTHER'S WIVES, LATE SMT. SHIVALINGAMMA AND LATE SMT.
KURUBARA THIPPAMMA FOR THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION AND
ALLOW THIS WRIT PETITION WITH COSTS AND GRANT SUCH OTHER
RELIEFS AS THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT TO GRANT, IN THE
CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND
EQUITY.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:7548
WP No. 102502 of 2025
HC-KAR
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS
DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
ORAL ORDER
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR)
1. Heard learned counsel Smt.V.Vidya for the
petitioner, learned counsel Sri.S.S.Chalwadi for the
respondents.
2. This petition is filed seeking a writ of
mandamus for a direction to the respondents to consider
the representation of the petitioner dated 02.02.2024 vide
Annexure-E.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that petitioner's
father late Sri.Kurubara Doddappa @ Doddanna and his
brothers, late Sri.Mariappa and late Sri.Lingappa were the
absolute owners of the house bearing Door No.16, Ward
No.9, Ballari town. It is submitted that one Kurubara
Bheemanna s/o Linganna had filed a suit in
O.S.No.348/1986 against the father of the petitioner
Sri.Kurubara Doddappa @ Doddanna and against the
NC: 2025:KHC-D:7548
HC-KAR
wives of brothers of petitioner's father namely
Shivalingamma w/o Mariappa and Kurubara Thippamma
w/o Lingappa. The said original suit was filed seeking relief
of declaration of title based on adverse possession and for
injunction in respect of the house property. The said
O.S.No.348/1986 came to be decreed by judgment and
decree dated 20.03.1989. The said order was challenged
before the learned Civil Judge, Ballari in R.A.No.18/1989
by the defendants i.e., the father of the petitioner and the
wives of his brother. The said appeal came to be
dismissed confirming the judgment and decree passed in
O.S.No.348/1986 by judgment and decree dated
05.11.1990.
4. It is submitted that thereafter the defendants in
O.S.No.348/1986 have filed R.S.A.No.70/1991 before this
Court challenging the judgment and decree in
R.A.No.18/1989 and O.S.No.348/1986. The said appeal
came to be allowed by this Court setting aside the
judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.348/1986.
NC: 2025:KHC-D:7548
HC-KAR
5. It is further submitted that during the pendency
of R.S.A.No.70/1991, an endorsement dated 21.09.1993
came to be issued by the respondents on the objections
raised by the father of the petitioner against transfer of
Khata in the name of Kurubara Bheemanna, directing the
petitioner to approach the office after disposal of regular
second appeal. But however on 28.06.1999, said Kurubara
Doddappa @ Doddanna, father of the petitioner died and
subsequently the wives of brothers of petitioner's father
also died. It is submitted that despite the petitioner
approaching the respondents requesting for transfer of
Khata in the name of the petitioner and the legal heirs of
father's brother, no action has been taken by the
respondents. However, on 02.02.2024 the petitioner made
a representation to the respondents, but respondents have
not acted upon. Left with no other alternative, the
petitioner is before this Court.
6. Learned counsel Sri.S.S.Chalawadi representing
the respondents submits that the representation so made
NC: 2025:KHC-D:7548
HC-KAR
by the petitioner would be considered if reasonable time is
granted in accordance with law. Under the circumstances,
I pass the following:
ORDER
i. Petition is allowed.
ii. Writ of mandamus is issued directing the
respondents to consider the representation
of the petitioner dated 02.02.2024 vide
Annexure-E and pass suitable orders in
accordance with law on considering the
judgment passed in R.S.A.No.70/1991 dated
02.12.1997.
iii. The said exercise shall be completed within
four weeks from the date of receipt of copy
of the order.
Sd/-
(PRADEEP SINGH YERUR)
JUDGE
KGK
