The High Court of Karnataka allowed a writ petition challenging a revenue authority's order cancelling a site area record. The court set aside the order as it involved disputed facts and civil title questions pending in civil suits.
Impugned order dated 09th April, 2013 passed by respondent No.1 is set aside; parties to abide by adjudication of pending suits.
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.
NC: 2023:KHC:38512 WP NO.14188 OF 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.14188 OF 2022 (KLR-RES)
BETWEEN:
SRI. KUMARA RAJA S. S/O P. SAIT AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/AT NO.31, 1ST MAIN ROAD, SESHADRIPURAM, BENGALURU - 560 020.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. G. KRISHNAMURTHY, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI. PRABHAKARA LAXMANA SHETTY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by ARUN KUMAR M S Location: High Court of Karnataka
NC: 2023:KHC:38512 WP NO.14188 OF 2022
NAGASHETTY HALLI, BENGALURU - 560 094.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MOHAMMED JAFFAR SHAH, AGA FOR R1 TO R3; SRI.K.S.UDAY, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. C.M.NAGABHUSHANA, ADVOCATE FOR R4)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 09TH APRIL, 2013 PASSED IN T.Q.MOJINI C.R.2/2012-2013 BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 VIDE ANNEXURE-A; AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R
In this writ petition, the petitioner is assailing order dated
09th April, 2013 (Annexure-A) passed by the respondent No.1.
passing the impugned order. It is further submitted by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner that, as the matter is of Civil in nature and therefore, the finding recorded by the respondent No.1 is liable to be quashed on the ground that the disputed question of the facts are involved in this writ petition.
NC: 2023:KHC:38512 WP NO.14188 OF 2022
and the contesting respondents. In this regard, I have also noticed that civil suits are pending consideration between the parties. Hence, I am of the view that the respondent No.1 would not have interfered with the disputed title of the property in question, as the same is in the domain of the Civil Court. In that view of the matter, order dated 09th April, 2013 (Annexure-A) passed by the respondent No.1 is hereby setaside. Parties are abide by the adjudication of the suits pending consideration before the competent Court. In the result writ petition is allowed.
SD/JUDGE
ARK
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court can quash the order of the Taluk Thasildar cancelling the revenue sketch which involved disputed questions of fact and civil title.
Whether interference with disputed revenue records in the presence of pending civil suits falls within the jurisdiction of the revenue authority.
SRI. KUMARA RAJA S. S/O P. SAIT
THASILDAR DODDABALLAPUR TALUK
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS
DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT
CHANNAKRISHNAMMA W/O LATE N. MUNIRAJU
E.S. INDIRESH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
