Writ appeal against dismissal of a challenge to a Deputy Commissioner's revisional order confirming a mutation entry effected on the basis of a registered sale deed over land claimed under a grant. The Division Bench held such mutation cannot be altered absent a civil suit establishing adverse title and dismissed the appeal.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. N. V. ANJARIA, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K V ARAVIND WRIT APPEAL NO. 303 OF 2024 (KLR-RES)
BETWEEN:
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI DANAPPA PRADHANAPPA PANIBHATE., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by VALLI MARIMUTHU Location: High Court of Karnataka
K.R. PURAM, BANGALURU – 560 036.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. NILOUFER AKBAR., AGA FOR R1 TO R4)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 30.10.2023 IN WP No. 8800/2021 PASSED BY THE THIS HON’BLE COURT SINGLE BENCH AT BENGALURU, PASS SUCH OTHER ORDER THE HONBLE COURT DEEMS FIT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA and
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K V ARAVIND
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA)
Heard learned advocate Mr. Danappa Pradhanappa
Panibhate for the appellant and learned Additional Government Advocate Smt. Niloufer Akbar for respondent Nos.1 to 4 who appeared upon service of copy of the appeal in advance.
and order dated 30.10.2023 passed by learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition.
4.2 The Deputy Commissioner inter alia took the view that, he did not have the jurisdiction to adjudicate the legality of the entry once it is effected pursuant to the registered sale deed. It was observed that the jurisdiction would lie with the competent Civil Court, even if the petitioner was claiming ownership of the land sold under the registered sale deed. With such reasoning, the revision application was dismissed.
“The petitioner herein claims right over the schedule property based on the order dated 31.08.1978, wherein the grant has been made in favour of Smt.Narayanamma W/o Late Hanumanthappa by the respondent-government in respect of the subject land, and petitioner herein claims to be cultivating the subject land till today. However, the perusal of the writ papers would indicate that the petitioner herein has filed O.S.No.25588/2017 before the Civil Court, Bangalore in respect of the land in question. It is also forthcoming from the finding recorded by both the respondentauthorities that respondent No.3 herein has arrived at a conclusion that the subject land was never considered as a government land and accordingly, based on the absolute sale deed dated 25.11.2013 registered in book No.KRI-I-06109-2016-17 produced by the contesting respondent to change the revenue records in relation to the petition schedule property and in terms of Section 129 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, both the respondent-authorities have concluded that the name of the contesting respondent shall be entered in the revenue records.”
law that once the registered sale deed is executed, the mutation based thereon would be justified and could not be altered unless any party establishes his right and title adverse to the mutation holder in the proceedings of civil suit.
6.1 It is to be noted that Original Suit No.25588 of 2017 instituted by the appellant-petitioner in respect of the very property is pending. In the said civil suit even the prayer is made to set aside the sale deed executed by respondent Nos.3, 4 and 5.
that the said suit is only for injunction, it is no answer to set at naught the mutation entry effected pursuant to a registered document.
Sd/(N. V. ANJARIA) CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/(K V ARAVIND) JUDGE
DDU
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14
1 issue framed by the court
Whether mutation entry based on a registered sale deed could be challenged in revenue revision without establishing title in a civil suit.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Smt. Narayanamma W/o. Late Hanumanthappa
State of Karnataka rep. by Secretary, Revenue Department
The Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru Urban District
The Assistant Commissioner, Bengaluru North Sub Division
The Tahasildar, Bengaluru East Taluk
Sri R. Chandra S/o. Ramaiah
N. V. Anjaria
K V Aravind
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
