Dismissed¶36

Sri. Ashwatha Ramegowda v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC27 Jan 2025WA/1858/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Dismissal of writ appeal on alternate-remedy grounds; Section 49 Karnataka Land Revenue Act 1964; order dated 10.05.2016 in W.P.No.27909/2016 (KLR-RES); NC: 2025:KHC:3625-DB; land records matter (KLR-RES), Bangalore North Taluk; appellant Ashwatha Ramegowda; respondent No.5 Sri Nagaraj M G; State of Karnataka revenue authorities (Principal Secretary, Joint Director of Land Records, Assistant Director of Land Records, Tahsildar); liberty to pursue statutory appeal; counsel for appellant permitted to retire; pending applications disposed.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the appellant to file an appeal in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964; any pending application stands disposed of upon disposal of the appeal. ¶36

Sri. Ashwatha Ramegowda Vs State of Karnataka — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty to the appellant to file an appeal in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964; any pending application stands disposed of upon disposal of the appeal.

¶36

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ appeal survives for consideration, having regard to the learned single Judge's observation in the impugned order that an alternate and efficacious remedy (appeal under Section 49 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964) is available against the order passed by the second respondent.

¶36

Court's answer

Having regard to the observation made by the learned single Judge in the impugned order (that an alternate and efficacious remedy of appeal exists), this writ appeal does not survive for consideration.

¶36

Ratio / Principle

The writ appeal is dismissed with liberty to the appellant to file an appeal in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964.

¶36

Key takeaways

Counsel for the appellant is permitted to retire from the case, and the retirement does not come in the way of deciding the writ appeal.obiter¶29

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Appeal No.1858 of 2016 (KLR-RES) — Ashwatha Ramegowda v. State of Karnataka & Ors. (High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru, Division Bench of K. Somashekar and Venkatesh Naik T, JJ.; judgment per K. Somashekar J., 27.01.2025). The appellant challenged the order dated 10.05.2016 of the learned single Judge in W.P.No.27909/2016 (KLR-RES), by which the writ petition was not entertained because, in terms of the impugned order passed by the second respondent, an appeal was provided for under Section 49 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 and an alternate and efficacious remedy therefore existed. Holding that, having regard to the single Judge's observation, the writ appeal did not survive for consideration, the Division Bench dismissed the appeal with liberty to the appellant to file an appeal under the relevant provisions of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964. Counsel for the appellant (Ms. Deepika, for Sri Pramoda K) was permitted to retire, and any pending application stands disposed of with the disposal of the appeal.

¶1

1 - NC: 2025:KHC:3625-DB WA No. 1858 of 2016

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 27^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T WRIT APPEAL NO. 1858 OF 2016 (KLR-RES)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SRI. ASHWATHA RAMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS S/O LATE VENKATARAMANAPPA R/AT MUDDINAPALYA GIDADAKONENAHALLI DAKHALE VISHWANEEDAM POST BANGALORE-560 091.

¶10

…APPELLANT

¶11

Digitally signed by SUMATHY KANNAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

(BY MS. DEEPIKA – ADVOCATE FOR SRI. PRAMODA K - ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE M.S.BUILDING DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD BANGALORE-560 001 REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.

¶15

THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT KANDAYA BHAVAN, K.G.ROAD BANGALORE-560 009.

¶16

THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS OFFICE OF THE ASST.COMMISSIONER

¶17

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:3625-DB WA No. 1858 of 2016

¶18

(LAND SURVEY SECTION) BANGALORE NORTH SUB DIVISION, KANDAYA BHAVAN, K.G.ROAD BANGALORE-560 009.

¶19

THE TAHSILDAR BANGALORE NORTH TALUK KANDAYA BHAVAN K.G.ROAD BANGALORE-560 009.

¶20

SRI NAGARAJ M G S/O GAVIYAPPA R/AT MUDDINAPALYA GIDADAKONENAHALLI DAKHALE VISHWANEEDAM POST BANGALORE-560 091.

¶21

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. HARISHA A S – AGA FOR RESPONDENTS NO.1 TO 4; SRI. SATISH M DODDAMANI – ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENTNO.5)

¶22

THIS WRIT APPEAL FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED IN THE WRIT PETITION NO.27909/2016(KLRRES) DATED 10/05/2016.

¶23

THIS WRIT APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR AND

¶25

HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T

¶26

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:3625-DB WA No. 1858 of 2016

¶27

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶28

(PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR) Learned counsel Ms.Deepika for the appellant is

¶29

present before the Court physically and represents Sri Pramoda K. She submits that the counsel for the appellant has written letter to the appellant to retire from the case and acknowledgement has not been received. She has filed a memo to that effect. The memo is taken on record. However, counsel for the appellant is permitted to retire from the case and the same does not come in deciding this writ appeal.

¶30

Learned AGA for respondent Nos.1 to 4 is present before the Court physically.

¶31

Whereas learned Senior Counsel Sri Satish M.Doddamani for respondent No.5 is present before the Court physically and submits that the issues are in narrow compass and he is ready to address arguments. He refers to paragraph 2 of the order passed by the learned single Judge in W.P.No.27909/2016 (KLR-RES) dated 10.05.2016 wherein it is observed that the impugned order is passed

¶32

¶33

NC: 2025:KHC:3625-DB WA No. 1858 of 2016

¶34

by the second respondent. In terms of the impugned order, an appeal is provided for, under Section 49 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964. In view of the existence of an alternate and efficacious remedy, it would be inappropriate to entertain this writ petition.

¶35

Having regard to the observation made by the

¶36

learned single Judge in the impugned order, this writ appeal does not survive for consideration. Accordingly, the writ appeal is dismissed with a liberty to the appellant to file an appeal in accordance with the relevant provisions of Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964.

¶37

Consequence upon disposal of the appeal, if any,

¶38

application is pending, the same shall stand disposed of.

¶39

SD/(K.SOMASHEKAR)

¶40

JUDGE

¶41

SD/(VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE

¶42

DKB

Sri. Ashwatha Ramegowda v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Ashwatha Ramegowda v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S. Thanush Ispat Private Limited Vs State of Karnataka

Gireesh Achar Vs Mr. P Subramanyam IFS

Sri B R Pathi Vs Karnataka Industrial Areas

Sri. a. M. Mahadevappa Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Govindaiah Vs Smt Arundati

R Lokanatha Vs Sri. Anil Yadav