[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Sri Subramanya P R vs Sri Nagesha on 21 January, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:3307-DB
WA No. 584 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH
WRIT APPEAL NO. 584 OF 2025 (KLR-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI. SUBRAMANYA P R
S/O. LATE. KOTE RAMAIAH
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,
ACCU- FARMER
NO. 64, 4TH CROSS,
MARAMMA TEMPLE ROAD,
PANATHUR VILLAGE,
VARTHUR HOBLI,
BENGALURU EAST TALUK
BANGALORE - 560 103.
Digitally signed ...APPELLANT
by
SREEDHARAN (BY SRI. NAGARAJU M C, ADVOCATE)
BANGALORE
SUSHMA
LAKSHMI AND:
Location: High
Court of
Karnataka 1. SRI. NAGESHA
S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 52YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.62,
PANATHUR VILLAGE AND POST
VARTHUR HOBLI,
BENGALURU EAST TALUK
BANGALORE - 560 103.
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:3307-DB
WA No. 584 of 2025
HC-KAR
2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
VIDHANA SOUDHA
BENGALURU - 560 002.
3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
BANGALORE NORTH
SUB DIVISION
BANGALORE - 560 002.
4. THE SPECIAL TAHASILDAR
BANAGLORE EAST TALUK
BANAGLORE - 560 036.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. M N SUDEV HEGDE, AGA FOR R2 - R4)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED
25.03.2025 IN WP No-8304/2025 (KLR-RES) AND DISMISSED
THE WRIT PETITION AS PRAYED FOR IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC:3307-DB
WA No. 584 of 2025
HC-KAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH)
1. The present intra-Court appeal has been filed by the
appellant who was the respondent No.4 before the Writ
Court in W P No. 8304/2025, which was disposed of by
the impugned order dated 25.03.2025.
2. The Assistant Commissioner had initiated suo motu
proceedings. The appellant filed a writ petition in W P. No.
7918/2023 before this Court impugning the suo motu
proceedings initiated by the Assistant Commissioner in
respect of the land bearing Survey No.54 situated at
Panathur Village, Varthur Hobli, Bengaluru East Taluk.
3. The case of the appellant /respondent No.4 before the
Writ Court in W.P No.7918/2023 was that he was granted
two(2) acres of land in Survey No.54, for which, Sugvali
Chit was issued in his favour on 17.05.1978. It was also
contented on behalf of the appellant that subsequently
mutation proceedings had taken place but his name was
not reflected in the RTC and despite several
NC: 2026:KHC:3307-DB
HC-KAR
representations, the Tahsildar did not take any action to
enter his name.
4. In view of the aforesaid position the appellant/
respondent No.4 filed WP No.7918/2023. This Court vide
order dated 11.04.2023 directed the Tahsildar to verify
the grant and take appropriate action on the
representation of the appellant/respondent No.4.
5. The Tahsildar, in compliance of the order dated
11.04.2026 passed in W.P No.7918/2023, came to the
conclusion that the land in question was a Government
Mufat Kaval land, and vide M.R. No.15/1980-81 the name
of the appellant was ordered to be entered. Hence, the
Tahsildar requested the Assistant Commissioner to initiate
the proceedings under Section 136(2) of the Karnataka
Land Revenue Act, 1964 (for short 'KLR Act') and take
further action. The Assistant Commissioner accordingly
registered the appeal under Section 136(2) of the KLR Act
and initiated the proceedings.
6. In the aforesaid proceedings before the Assistant
Commissioner, Sri. Nagesha, the petitioner in Writ
NC: 2026:KHC:3307-DB
HC-KAR
Petition No. 8304/2025 claimed to be the original grantee
of the land in Survey No.54 and made an application to
implead himself as respondent before the Assistant
Commissioner. The Assistant Commissioner had rejected
the request of Sri. Nagesha, the petitioner in W.P
No.8304/2025. Aggrieved by the said order of rejecting
the application for impleadment by the Assistant
Commissioner, Sri Nagesha had filed writ petition in
W.P.No.8304/2025 which came to be allowed and the
order passed by the Assistant Commissioner rejecting the
application for impleadment was set aside by the
impugned order.
7. The learned Single Judge had directed the Assistant
Commissioner to consider the plea of the Tahsildar and
also hear the appellant herein as well as Sri. Nagesha and
pass final order in the proceedings under Section 136(2)
of the KLR Act.
8. Considering the nature of the order passed by the learned
Single Judge that all the parties would be heard by the
Assistant Commissioner for taking a final decision in
NC: 2026:KHC:3307-DB
HC-KAR
appeal under Section 136(2) of the KLR Act, we do not
find any ground to interfere with the impugned order. The
order does not in any way is prejudicial to the interest of
the appellant herein.
In view thereof, we dismiss this appeal.
We make it again clear that the Assistant Commissioner
will hear the Tahsildar, Sri. Nagesha and the appellant herein
before taking the final decision in pending appeal in the
proceedings under Section 136(2) of the KLR Act.
In view of the dismissal of this writ appeal, pending IA's,
if any, stands disposed of.
Sd/-
(D K SINGH)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(S RACHAIAH)
JUDGE
UN
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8
