The High Court of Karnataka dismissed a writ petition filed by an individual seeking mutation of a property and entry of his name in the RTC register. The Court held that since the founder fact of the grant was not established and the original Grant Register did not contain the petitioner's name, the petition was devoid of merits.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF NOVEMBER , 2022 BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT
WRIT PETITION NO.2841 OF 2016(KLR-RR/SUR)
BETWEEN:
SRI.C.MAHESH SON OF LATE CHIKKAHANUMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.112, ABBIGERE, NEAR GANAPATHI TEMPLE, ABBIGERE LAT BUS STOP, BANGALORE – 560 090.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI.H B RAJU, ADVOCATE)
AND:
2
YESHWANTHAPURA SUB-DIVISION, BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT.
… RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.V SESHU, HCGP FOR R1-R4)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE CASES OF THE PETITIONER ON PAR WITH THE DIRECTIONS ISSUED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN W.P.18750/2010 DATED 21.06.2010 AND SUBSEQUENT ORDER DATED 09.01.2015 PASSED IN W.P.55493-55496/2014 (KLR-RR/SUR) TO CONSIDER THE CASE OF THE PETITIONERS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW TO REVEAL THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER IN COLUMN NO.9 & 12 OF COMPUTERIZED RTC AND MUTATION REGISTER IN RESPECT OF SCHEDULE PROPERTY AT ANNEXURE-C.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER
Petitioner is knocking at the doors of Writ Court seeking a direction to the Respondents to consider his claim for entering of his name in Column Nos.9 & 12 of computerized RTC by effecting mutation of entries to the subject property. Learned counsel for the Petitioner draws attention of the Court to Annexure - A which is a xerox copy of a Saguvali Grant Extract and the orders of earlier rounds of litigation in W.P.No.16037 to 16048/1992 disposed off on 01.06.1992 and Judgment
3
dated 09.01.2015 in W.P.No.55496/2014 (KLR-RR/SUR) in support of his claim.
Respondents having entered appearance through learned HCGP vehemently oppose the writ petition contending that the original Grant Register does not contain name of the Petitioner or his father at all. The original Register which is shown to the Court at Page No.109 mentions names of four persons other than the Petitioner and his father in respect of the land in Sy.No.13. Therefore, he seeks dismissal of the writ petition.
4
established, the relief sought for in the writ petition cannot be granted.
In view of the above, this petition being devoid of merits, is liable to be dismissed and accordingly, it is, costs having been made easy.
This Court appreciates the able assistance rendered by the learned HCGP in the matter.
Sd/JUDGE
Bsv
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to an order directing the authorities to consider his claim for mutation and entering his name in the RTC register when the original Grant Register does not contain
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sri.C.Mahesh Son of Late Chikkanumaiah
The State of Karnataka
The Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore District
The Assistant Commissioner, Bangalore North Taluk
The Tahasildar, Bangalore North Taluk
Krishna S.Dixit
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
