Disposed

Sri. Giriyappa v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC21 Oct 2024WP/23698/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging the dismissal of an appeal to cancel an E-Katha entry, the bench held that questions of fact regarding title, succession, and partition must be decided in a civil suit, precluding adjudication in revenue proceedings.

What did the court decide?

The petition stands disposed of without adjudicating the merits of the title dispute in the revenue proceedings.

Sri. Giriyappa Vs the State of Karnataka — Property and Title | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:42007 WP No. 23698 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 21^ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 23698 OF 2024 (LB-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI. GIRIYAPPA S/O LATE THIMMAIAH @ THIMMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS RESIDENT OF TURUVEKERE VILLAGE, YADIYURU HOBLI KUNIGAL TALUK TUMKURU DISTRICT-4572101

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. NAIK N R.,ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by ANAND N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND PANCHAYATH RAJ DEPARTMENT (COMPETENT AUTHORITY) BANGALORE), 3^RD FLOOR, M S BUILDING DR B R AMBEDKAR ROAD BENGALURU-560001.

¶14

EXECUTIVE OFFICER TALUK PANCHAYATH KUNIGAL-572130.

¶15

¶16

NC: 2024:KHC:42007 WP No. 23698 of 2024

¶17

THE PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER NADEMAVINAPURA VILLAGE PANCHAYATH YADIYURU HOBLI

¶18

KUNIGAL TALUK-572130.

¶19

SMT NANJAMMA W/O LATE RAMANNA THURVEKERE VILLAGE YADIYUR HOBLI KUNIGAL TALUK

¶20

TUMKURU DISTRICT-572101.

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SMT.SPOORTHI., HCGP FOR R1;

¶23

SRI. A. NAGARAJAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R4)

¶24

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE R-2 IN NO.V.P.C.39/2022-23/1107 DATED 29.07.2024 WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNX-H TO THE WRIT PETITION.TO CANCEL THE E-KHATHA STANDS IN THE NAME OF R-4 IN RESPECT OF THE PROPERTY BEARING NO. 83, KHATHA NO. 3111, E-KHATHA IN NO. 152500400101120078 MEASURING IN TO EXTENT EAST TO WEST 17.0688 METERS (56 FEET) AND NORTH TO SOUTH 17.98 METERS (57 FEETS) WHICH IS SITUATED AT NADEMAVINAPURA GRAM PANCHAYATH THUVVEKERE VILLAGE YADIYUR HOBLI, KUNIGAL TALUK.VIDE ANNX-A.

¶25

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:42007 WP No. 23698 of 2024

¶26

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶27

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD

¶28

ORAL ORDER

¶29

The petitioner has called in question the second respondent's order dated 29.07.2024 [ Annexure-H ] dismissing the petitioner's appeal under Section 269 of the Karnataka Grama Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993. The petitioner has filed the subject appeal with the second respondent for cancellation of the revenue entries [E-Katha] for a residential property in favour of the fourth respondent. The second respondent, after a detailed reference to the rival claims including the relationship inter se the petitioner, the fourth respondent and others, has dismissed the appeal.

¶30

The learned counsel for the petitioner is heard for the final disposal of the petition, and so are

¶31

¶32

NC: 2024:KHC:42007 WP No. 23698 of 2024

¶33

Ms. Spoorthi V., a learned High Court Government

¶34

Pleader for the first respondent, and Mr. A. Nagarajappa, a learned standing counsel for the second and third respondents. Mr. N. R. Naik, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that

¶35

[i] the E-Katha for the larger property

¶36

stood in the name of the petitioner's father, Sri. Thimmaiah @ Thimmegowda, and on his demise,

¶37

[ii] this larger property is divided amongst

¶38

his four sons including himself and his deceased brothers under whom the fourth respondent claims, and

¶39

[iii] the petitioner and his deceased brother

¶40

are allotted the subject Residential Property in such partition, but the fourth respondent has obtained the

¶41

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:42007 WP No. 23698 of 2024

¶42

revenue entries in her favour

¶43

exclusively.

¶44

This Court must opine that the circumstances relied upon by the petitioner will have to be considered in a properly instituted suit as it involves questions of fact impacting title and possession, and the petitioner cannot seek such adjudication in the revenue proceedings to substantiate either title or possession.

¶45

Hence, the petition stands disposed of subject

¶46

to all just exceptions in law.

¶47

Sd/(B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE

¶48

Sri. Giriyappa v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Giriyappa v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri. Francis D Souza Vs the Executive Engineer

Sri.S.Manohar Reddy Vs the Commissioner

Manoj Kumar C Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. S.S.R. Jayanth Vs the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike

The Kasturi Serenity Residents Association (Regd) Vs State of Karnataka

Mohamed Mahazar Vs the State of Karnataka