[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Smt Thimmamma vs State Of Karnataka on 22 January, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:3885-DB
WA No. 1127 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH
WRIT APPEAL NO.1127 OF 2025 (KLR-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. THIMMAMMA
W/O THIMMEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS,
2. SRI. RANGEGOWDA
S/O RANGEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
Digitally
signed by
GEETHA P G 3. RAMESH
Location: S/O AMASEGOWDA
HIGH AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
4. MANJUNATHA
S/O CHUNCHEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS
5. C. AHSHOKA
S/O CHANNEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:3885-DB
WA No. 1127 of 2025
HC-KAR
6. DORESWAMY S
S/O SHIVEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS
7. SMT. SANNAMMA
W/O RANGEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
8. MANJEGOWDA
S/O RANGEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
ALL ARE RESIDING AT
CHOWDENALLI VILLAGE,
NUGGEHALLI HOBLI,
CHANNARAYAPATANA TALUK,
HASSAN DISTRICT-573 116.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SMT. RACHANA, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI SRINIVAS V., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
REPRESENTED BY IT'S PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
M.S. BUILDING,
BANGALORE-560 001.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
HASSAN DISTRICT
HASSAN-573 201.
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC:3885-DB
WA No. 1127 of 2025
HC-KAR
3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
HASSAN SUB DIVISION
HASSAN-573 201.
4. NAGAMANI
W/O. JAGADISH
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
R/AT NEAR AYYAPPA SWAMY TEMPLE
DODDAPETE,
KUNIGAL TOWN AND TALUK,
TUMKUR DISTRICT-572 130
AND ALSO AT CHOWDENALLI VILLAGE,
NUGGEHALLI HOBLI,
CHANNARAYAPATANA TALUK,
HASSAN DISTRICT-573 131.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI M.N. SUDEV HEGDE, AGA FOR R.1 TO R.3.)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 4 AND 5
OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW
THIS APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE
LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN W.P.NO.22754/2024 ON
28.02.2025 AND CONSEQUENTLY DISMISS THE WRIT
PETITION FILED BY RESPONDENT NO.4, ETC.
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
-4-
NC: 2026:KHC:3885-DB
WA No. 1127 of 2025
HC-KAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH)
1. The connected matter namely, Writ Appeal No.2091 of
2025 was disposed of by this Court vide the judgment dated
08.01.2026 in Writ Appeal. The present dispute also pertains to
the very same survey number i.e., Sy.No.30, Block No.12,
totally measuring 8 acres and 10 guntas, situated at
K.Chowdenahalli Village, Nuggehalli Hobli, Channarayapatna
Taluk. The judgment dated 08.01.2026 passed in Writ Appeal
No.2091 of 2025 reads as under:-
"1. The present intra Court appeal has been filed
by the appellants, who were not the parties before
the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.26796/2025, in
which the judgment and order dated 09.10.2025 has
been passed.
2. W.P.No.26796/2025 was filed by one Smt.
Nagamani seeking a writ of mandamus to consider
the representation given by her to the Tahsildar to
effect "pouthi khata" and also to conduct "hudbust"
and fix the boundaries in respect of Survey No.30,
Block No.12 admeasuring 4 acres with 10 guntas of
kharab land out of the total 8 acres 10 guntas
NC: 2026:KHC:3885-DB
HC-KAR
situated at K.Chowdenahalli Village, Nuggehalli Hobli,
Channarayapatna Taluk. It appears that the said
land was in the name of late Venkatarama Dixit and
Smt. Nagamani is the legal representative of late
Venkatarama Dixit. The Assistant Commissioner had
passed an order on 25.11.2022 effecting the RTC
entries in the name of late Venkatarama Dixit s/o
Krishnappa in respect of the aforesaid land.
3. The aforesaid writ petition filed by Smt.
Nagamani came to be disposed of vide impugned
judgment and order dated 09.10.2025 taking note of
the stand of the learned Additional Government
Advocate that if the petitioner-Smt. Nagamani would
make an application in the prescribed format for
transfer of khata from the name of late Venkatarama
Dixit to the names of the legal representatives along
with the necessary documents within a period of two
weeks from the date of the order, such application
would be considered and appropriate order would be
passed within six weeks thereafter.
4. We do not see that the impugned judgment
and order requires an interference by us inasmuch as
the legal representatives of late Venkatarama Dixit
would be entitled to mutate their names in his place
after his demise.
NC: 2026:KHC:3885-DB
HC-KAR
5. The apprehension of the appellants that the
Tahsildar may pass an order which would affect their
right over the land is totally misplaced. The Tahsildar
will pass the order in accordance with the law as
directed by this Court in the aforesaid writ petition.
6. We also clarify that the Tahsildar would hear
the appellants, if their rights are likely to get affected
by an order to be passed on the representation of
the petitioner-Smt. Nagamani, the legal
representative of late Venkatarama Dixit. The
Tahsildar shall issue a notice to the appellants before
passing the final order on the representation of the
petitioner.
7. With the aforesaid observations, we dispose of
this writ appeal.
In view of disposal of the writ appeal, pending
IAs, if any, do not survive for consideration and
accordingly, they stand disposed of."
2. We therefore, dispose of the present writ appeal in terms
of the aforesaid judgment passed by this Court in Writ Appeal
No.2091 of 2025.
NC: 2026:KHC:3885-DB
HC-KAR
In view of disposal of the writ appeal, pending IAs, if any,
do not survive for consideration and accordingly, they stand
disposed of.
Sd/-
(D K SINGH)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(S RACHAIAH)
JUDGE
VMB
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13
